Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
PBIS and equity for African American students with and without disabilities: a gap analysis
(USC Thesis Other)
PBIS and equity for African American students with and without disabilities: a gap analysis
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
PBIS AND EQUITY FOR AFRICAN AMERICAN STUDENTS WITH AND WITHOUT
DISABILITIES: A GAP ANALYSIS
by
Apryl Thomas
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
December 2020
Copyright 2020 Apryl Thomas
ii
DEDICATION
To every school aged African American student with a disability struggling. Keep your
head up! You are beautiful, brilliant, talented, and gifted. You can and will succeed. Do not let
anyone tell you different. Learn your history. Learn about ancient Kemet, ancient Kush,
Ethiopia, and the Nile Valley contributions to world. You can create the happy and prosperous
life you dream of. I am proof. I am an African American student with a disability, kicked out of
school, and told by my teachers that I would never graduate high school. I never listened to that
and I never gave up. I went on to complete high school, graduate from UCLA with my
bachelor’s degree, obtain two master’s degrees, and now complete my doctorate at USC. You
can do it!
To my family, to my husband, all that I am is because of you! You give me the
foundation, the unconditional love, the support, the peace, and the safety to pursue all of my
goals. To my mother, father, brother, and sister. To my great uncle Raymond, since the age of
nine you have always been my motivation and inspiration! Rest in peace. To my great aunt
Beverly and great aunt Shirley. Rest in peace. To my beloved cousin R.J. Rest in peace. To all
of my cousins. To the Cannon Family, this is for you!
Dedicated to the movement, until we can breathe!
To my community, love and gratitude!
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thanks to my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ for carrying me this journey! I would like to
acknowledge Daniel Losen and Tyrone Howard at UCLA, for your leadership and excellence in
the field! Thank you, Dr. Elyn Saks at USC for being my mentor and constant support! I would
also like to acknowledge Catherine Lhamon for the brief introduction, acknowledgement of my
research, and your exemplary leadership on this subject. Thank you to Hip-Hop culture for
raising me. Most importantly, the principals who participated in this study, none of this would be
possible without you!
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION ............................................................................................................................... ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................................................... iii
LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................... ix
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................ xi
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................. xii
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 1
Introduction to the Problem of Practice ....................................................................................... 1
Importance of Addressing the Problem ....................................................................................... 3
Organizational Context and Mission ........................................................................................... 4
Field Performance Goal ............................................................................................................... 4
Description of Stakeholder Groups ............................................................................................. 5
Stakeholders’ Performance Goals ............................................................................................... 5
Stakeholder Group for the Study ................................................................................................. 6
Purpose of the Project and Questions .......................................................................................... 7
Organization of the Dissertation .................................................................................................. 7
Definitions ................................................................................................................................... 8
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................................... 11
Social Context of Exclusionary Discipline Practices ................................................................ 11
School-to-Prison Pipeline .......................................................................................................... 12
Zero-Tolerance Policies ............................................................................................................. 13
Disproportionality and African American Students .................................................................. 15
Social Economics Causes .......................................................................................................... 16
Cultural Misunderstandings ....................................................................................................... 17
Disproportionality and African American Students with Disabilities ....................................... 18
Overrepresentation .................................................................................................................... 19
Ineffectiveness of Exclusionary Discipline Practices ................................................................ 20
Alternatives to Exclusionary Discipline .................................................................................... 22
Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS) .......................................................... 22
Culturally Responsive Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (CRPBIS) ................ 23
School-Wide Positive Restorative Discipline (SWPRD) ...................................................... 25
Gap Analysis Conceptual Framework ....................................................................................... 26
Knowledge ................................................................................................................................. 28
Conceptual Knowledge of Best Practices .............................................................................. 29
v
Procedural Knowledge of How to Overcome Barriers to Implementation ........................... 30
Motivation ................................................................................................................................. 31
Self-Efficacy Theory ............................................................................................................. 32
Expectancy Value Theory ..................................................................................................... 33
Organization .............................................................................................................................. 38
General Organizational Theory ............................................................................................. 38
Cultural Models ..................................................................................................................... 39
Multicultural Norms .............................................................................................................. 39
Cultural Settings .................................................................................................................... 40
Resources ............................................................................................................................... 40
Summary .................................................................................................................................... 43
CHAPTER 3: METHODS ............................................................................................................ 44
Purpose of the Project and Questions ........................................................................................ 44
Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge and Motivation and the
Organizational Context .............................................................................................................. 44
Methodological Approach and Rationale .................................................................................. 47
Participating Stakeholders ......................................................................................................... 48
Survey Sampling Criteria and Rationale ................................................................................... 49
Criterion 1 .............................................................................................................................. 49
Criterion 2 .............................................................................................................................. 49
Survey Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale ........................................................... 49
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale ............................................................................... 50
Criterion 1 .............................................................................................................................. 50
Criterion 2 .............................................................................................................................. 50
Interview Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale ....................................................... 50
Data Collection and Instrumentation ......................................................................................... 51
Quantitative Data Collection and Instrumentation .................................................................... 51
Survey Instrument ................................................................................................................. 51
Survey Procedures ................................................................................................................. 51
Qualitative Data Collection and Instrumentation ...................................................................... 52
Interviews .............................................................................................................................. 52
Documents and Artifacts ....................................................................................................... 53
Data Analysis ............................................................................................................................. 53
Quantitative Data ................................................................................................................... 53
Data Cleaning ........................................................................................................................ 54
vi
Qualitative Data ..................................................................................................................... 54
Open Coding .......................................................................................................................... 54
Theme Development ............................................................................................................. 56
Validity and Reliability ............................................................................................................. 57
Credibility and Trustworthiness ................................................................................................ 58
Ethics ......................................................................................................................................... 58
CHAPTER 4:RESULTS AND FINDINGS .................................................................................. 61
Purpose of the Project and Questions ........................................................................................ 61
Participating Stakeholders ......................................................................................................... 61
Results and Findings .................................................................................................................. 64
Knowledge Results .................................................................................................................... 65
Overcoming Barriers to PBIS ................................................................................................ 65
Quantitative: Open-Ended Survey Questions ........................................................................ 66
Qualitative ............................................................................................................................. 66
Themes ...................................................................................................................................... 69
Breaking Down Barriers of PBIS & Fostering Collaboration ............................................... 69
Best Practices & Recommendations for Implementing PBIS ............................................... 71
Motivation Results ..................................................................................................................... 72
Quantitative ........................................................................................................................... 72
Qualitative ............................................................................................................................. 74
Value Diversity Equity and Inclusion ....................................................................................... 75
Quantitative ........................................................................................................................... 75
Qualitative ............................................................................................................................. 77
Working Towards High Fidelity Implementation (Supporting & Training Teachers) ............. 78
Value Decreasing Suspensions .............................................................................................. 79
Changing Policy & Behavior to Reduce Rates ...................................................................... 84
Organizational Results ............................................................................................................... 85
Cultural Responsiveness ........................................................................................................ 85
Encouraging Culturally Responsive Positive Behavior Interventions & Reinforcing Cultural
Norms ........................................................................................................................................ 89
Resources ............................................................................................................................... 90
Answering Research Questions ................................................................................................. 90
Research Question One ......................................................................................................... 90
Research Question Two ......................................................................................................... 91
Research Question Three ....................................................................................................... 95
vii
CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................... 97
Organizational Performance Goal ............................................................................................. 97
Description of Stakeholder Groups ........................................................................................... 98
Stakeholders’ Performance Goals ............................................................................................. 98
Purpose of the Project and Questions ........................................................................................ 99
Knowledge Influence Recommendations ................................................................................ 100
Increasing Educational Leaders’ Knowledge of Best Practices in Decreasing Exclusionary
Discipline for African American Students with Disabilities ............................................... 103
Increasing Educational Leaders’ Knowledge of How to Overcome Barriers to Implementing
PBIS at the Middle School and High School Level ............................................................ 104
Motivation Influence Recommendations ................................................................................ 105
Administrators Need to Feel Efficacious in their Ability to Implement all Three Tiers of
Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports Strategies at the Middle and High School
Level .................................................................................................................................... 107
Administrators Need to Value Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity ......................................... 108
Administrators Need to Value Decreasing Suspension and Expulsion for African American
Students and African American Students with Disabilities ................................................ 109
Organizational Influence Recommendations .......................................................................... 110
Schools Need the Resources to Ensure all Staff and Teachers Have the Training and Tools
Required to Implement PBIS with Fidelity ......................................................................... 111
All Stakeholders Need to Promote a Sense of Value in Creating Multicultural School Norms
............................................................................................................................................. 112
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan ..................................................................... 113
Implementation and Evaluation Framework ....................................................................... 113
Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectations ................................................................. 113
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators ............................................................................. 114
Level 3: Behavior ................................................................................................................ 116
Level 2: Learning ................................................................................................................ 120
Level 1: Reaction ................................................................................................................. 123
Evaluation Tools .................................................................................................................. 124
Data Analysis and Reporting ............................................................................................... 125
Summary .................................................................................................................................. 126
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach ............................................................................ 127
Limitations and Delimitations ................................................................................................. 127
Future Research ....................................................................................................................... 130
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 130
viii
References ................................................................................................................................... 132
APPENDIX A Survey Items ....................................................................................................... 151
APPENDIX B Interview Protocol ............................................................................................... 159
APPENDIX C Sample Evaluation Measuring Kirkpatrick Levels ............................................. 163
ix
LIST OF TABLES
Table Title Page
1 Organizational Mission, Organizational Performance Goal, and Stakeholder
Performance Goals for California K–12 Schools 6
2 California K–12 School Administrators’ Knowledge Relevant to PBIS
Implementation 31
3 Motivation Influences, Motivation Types, and Motivation Assessment 37
4 Organizational Influences, Organizational Types, and Organizational Assessment
42
5 Sampling Strategy and Timeline 51
6 Measures of Dispersion and Central Tendency for Motivation-SE Influencers 74
7 Frequencies for Motivation-SE Influencers 74
8 Measures of Dispersion and Central Tendency for Motivation-V Influencers 80
9 Frequencies for Motivation-V Influencers 80
10 Frequency of Whether Racist or Non-Racist Represents Experiences at School 81
11 Frequency of Whether Homogenous or Diverse Represents Experiences at School
81
12 Measures of Dispersion and Central Tendency for Organization-CS Influencers 86
13 Frequencies for Organization-CS Influencers 86
14 Table Title 93
15 Table Title 95
16 Organizational Mission, Organizational Performance Goal, and Stakeholder
Performance Goals for California K–12 Schools 99
17 Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations 102
18 Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations 106
19 Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations 111
20 Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for Internal Outcomes 115
x
21 Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External Outcomes 116
22 Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation 118
23 Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors 119
24 Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program 122
xi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Title Page
1 Interactive KM 46
2 Gender Demographics 62
3 Education Demographics 63
4 Race and Ethnicity Demographics 63
5 Experience Demographics 64
6 Dashboard 126
xii
ABSTRACT
Utilizing Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis, this study evaluated positive behavior
interventions and supports (PBIS) effectiveness to reduce disparate rates of exclusionary
discipline practices for African American students with and without disabilities in California
middle and high schools. This study aimed to discover best practices for increased equitable
outcomes in discipline practices for African American students with and without disabilities.
This study also aimed to unpack and overcome some of the barriers with implementing PBIS at
the middle school and high school level. The data identified gaps in knowledge when it comes to
best practices for African American students with and without disabilities and gaps in knowledge
when identifying and eliminating barriers in implementing PBIS at the middle and high school
level. The data identified gaps in motivation when implementing all three tiers of PBIS with
fidelity and a gap in motivation to communicate and value diversity, equity and inclusion. Lastly,
the study found a organizational barrier: lack of creating multicultural school norms. In
conclusion, it is recommended that in order to increase equitable outcomes in closing the
discipline gap for African American students with and without disabilities, PBIS is combined
with culturally competent methods (CRPBIS), implicit bias training, and restorative justice
(SWPRD).
1
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
Introduction to the Problem of Practice
Educators and school administrators (educational leaders) disproportionately apply
exclusionary discipline practices (including out-of-school suspensions and expulsions) to
impoverished, minority, and disabled students. In the 2011–2012 academic year, more than
three million public school students nationally received suspensions; of these students, African
American students received suspensions three times more frequently—and expulsions three and
a half times more frequently—than their White peers (U.S. Department of Education Office of
Civil Rights, 2014). Furthermore, educational leaders suspend and expel African American
students with disabilities at three times the rate of non-disabled White students, even though
children with disabilities have protections under special education laws (Brownstein, 2010; U.S.
Department of Education, 2012). The effects of exclusionary discipline practices extend far
beyond school walls; K–12 schools are pushing students out of school and into the prison system
(also known as the school-to-prison-pipeline). Although African American students make up
only 16% of national student enrollment, they represent 27% of students referred to law
enforcement and 31% of in-school arrests (U.S. Department of Education Office of Civil Rights,
2014). In a study of large school districts (i.e., more than 50,000 students enrolled) white
students represented 31% of student enrollment but only 21% of arrests (St. George, 2012). With
the end to Obama era federal guidelines and or the Safe and Supportive School Act educational
leaders many lose valuable gains in closing the discipline gap.
For decades many psychologists and behavioral health professionals have advocated for
the use of positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS) practices instead of exclusionary
discipline practices. PBIS involves teaching children school-appropriate behavior, with the
2
ultimate goal of increasing academic skills and prosocial behavior. When using PBIS, educators
provide students with specific rules of conduct and positively reinforce students for engaging in
individual appropriate behaviors. Unlike exclusionary discipline practices, PBIS does not
involve punishment or exclusion; most importantly, PBIS provides students with learning
opportunities. Educational research groups have identified PBIS as a more effective and
equitable alternative to exclusionary discipline practices (American Psychological Association
Zero Tolerance Task Force, 2008; Civil Rights Project UCLA, 2000).
However, finding a truly viable and equitable alternative to the use of exclusionary
discipline practices presents its challenges. With so many advocates for PBIS, it is still not a
widely used practice. According to the California PBIS Coalition, there are only roughly about
10% of California schools evaluated and implementing PBIS with at least 40% fidelity
(California PBIS Coalition, 2016). Implementing PBIS presents problems in that there is also a
lack of research on PBIS in middle schools and high schools. There are barriers to
implementation. In addition, although PBIS is a better alternative than exclusion, PBIS has
shown significant reductions in the overall rate of out-of-school suspensions and expulsions;
however, there has not been a significant reduction for African American students with and
without disabilities (Kourea et al., 2016; Losen, 2015). Research has shown that when PBIS is
combined with other culturally responsive pedagogies it is effective in reducing suspension and
expulsion for targeted groups such as Native Americans (Losen, 2015). Culturally responsive
PBIS (CRPBIS) has proven value in reducing disproportionality in exclusionary discipline
practices among African Americans (Bal, 2018; Kourea et al., 2016). However, CRPBIS is
newly developing and not widely implemented making it difficult to conduct research on. In
California, the Safe and Supportive Schools Act showed good gains however the grant expired in
3
2015. In 2020 we are facing the end of Obama era regulations designed to monitor and reduced
these disparities. This study seeks to create research on middle schools and high schools, unpack
the potential barriers to implementation using Clark and Estes’ (2008) Gap Analysis Framework
and help identify best practices for reducing exclusionary discipline among African American
students with and without disabilities.
Importance of Addressing the Problem
The disparate use of inappropriate and ineffective exclusionary discipline practices—
instead of the use of equitable PBIS practices—in high-poverty and high minority schools is
leading to the criminalization of African American children, especially students with emotional,
psychological, or behavioral disabilities (American Civil Liberties Union, 2012).This issue of
systematic and institutional racism is of dire need of being addressed. If educators and
administrators continue to use exclusionary discipline practices instead of equitable forms of
PBIS interventions, the neediest and most vulnerable children will end up behind prison bars.
Disparate exclusionary discipline practices coupled with disparate in school arrests lead to higher
dropout rates, prolonged issues of poverty, lower rates of college attendance, and further
incarceration later in the life. The U.S. already has the world’s largest prison system and is the
world leader in prisoners but ranks 26
th
in high school graduates among the world’s richest
nations (Associated Press, 2010). Along with social, political, and moral issues one must
consider the following economic issues. Mass incarceration cost $182 billion per year and does
little to increase public safety or reduce crime (eji.org). It cost over $34,000 a year on average to
incarcerate a prisoner (American Civil Liberties Union, 2008). On the other hand —graduating
high school and attending college— bachelor’s degree holders contribute $278, 000 more to their
4
local economy, $44,000 in state and local taxes, and $771,000 more in annual individual
charitable giving over their lifetime (collegepossible.org).
Organizational Context and Mission
Part of the mission of California K–12 schools is to uphold federal and state laws, acting
in accordance with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).
These laws prohibit discrimination against people with disabilities in programs that receive
federal financial assistance like California K–12 schools. Further compliance with the law
protects children and adults with disabilities from exclusion and unequal treatment in schools,
jobs, and the community (Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund). Another aspect of
California K–12 schools’ mission is to adhere to the AB 420 Assembly Bill of 2014, which
limits the use of exclusionary discipline.
Field Performance Goal
In response to findings that administrators overuse exclusionary discipline practices on
African American students nationwide, administrators at California K–12 schools set a global
goal to reduce the percentage of suspensions and expulsions for African American students with
and without disabilities. Specifically, they seek to decrease suspension and expulsion rates by
13% for African American students with disabilities from the rate of 30% in 2012 to 17% or less,
and for African American without disabilities by 5%, from the current rate of 9.1% to 4% or less
by 2020 (U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights, 2014). Administrators created
this global goal in adherence with the AB 420 Assembly Bill of 2014; they also drew ideas from
state accountability measures suggested by Civil Rights UCLA (2000), American Civil Liberties
Union (ACLU), Berkeley Law, and Duke University School of Law. In creating this goal,
5
administrators also ensured that it was in accordance with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
of 1973 and the ADA. School administrators tracked progress towards this goal using annual
state monitoring dashboards. The U.S. Department of Education Civil Rights Department
continued to collect and analyze data regarding the state’s use of exclusionary discipline
practices.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
The stakeholder groups are educational leaders, school administrators, teachers, and
students. Each of these groups must work together to successfully implement culturally
competent PBIS plans in California middle and high schools. Research suggests that the
application of culturally responsive positive behavior interventions and supports (CRPBIS) plans
that include culturally competent school norms may lead to reductions in rates of exclusionary
discipline practices for African American students with and without disabilities (Bal, 2018;
Losen, 2015). School administrators are responsible for designing and implementing school-wide
culturally competent PBIS plans. The school administrators will also oversee and ensure that
teachers reach their goal of implementing CRPBIS in their classrooms daily and on an individual
basis. Students’ responsibilities include being able to articulate multicultural appropriate school
norms, demonstrating positive prosocial behavior, and serving as models of academic behavior
for their fellow students.
Stakeholders’ Performance Goals
6
Table 1
Organizational Mission, Organizational Performance Goal, and Stakeholder Performance Goals
for California K–12 Schools
Organizational Mission
To uphold federal and state laws in accordance with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation
Act of 1973, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act by not discriminating against people with disabilities (i.e., through exclusion or
unequal treatment; Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund)
Organizational Performance Goal
By the end of the school year 2020, reduce the rate of suspensions and expulsions for African
American students without disabilities by 5% (i.e., from the current rate of 9.1% to 4% or less)
and for African American students with disabilities by 13 % (i.e., from 30% in 2012 to 17% or
less)
Stakeholder Performance Goals
Stakeholder Goal Completion Date
School
Administrators
Ensure 100% of teachers implement culturally competent
PBIS with students
September 2020
Teachers Implement CRPBIS with students September 2020
Students
100% of students able to articulate at least three
multicultural school norms
June 2020
Stakeholder Group for the Study
The joint efforts of all stakeholders are necessary to achieve the overall organizational
goal of reducing the disparate use of exclusionary discipline practice on African American
students with disabilities. However, this study will focus specifically on educational leaders and
or school administrators. The administrators’ goal is to ensure 100% of teachers implement
culturally competent PBIS procedures (including providing behavior support plans that teaches
children appropriate school conduct) in their daily activities and encourage teachers’ cultural
7
responsiveness. Failure to accomplish this goal will lead to continued noncompliance, which in
turn may lead to a loss in funding. Funding losses adversely impact the organization’s ability to
provide education, support, and interventions to its students. Noncompliance may also affect the
organization’s overall goal to reduce the rate of suspensions and expulsion among African
American students with disabilities.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the degree to which California middle and high
schools achieve their goal of reducing suspension and expulsion rates for African American
students with and without disabilities. The researcher will explore the knowledge, motivation,
and organizational influences related to achieving this goal, focusing specifically on educational
leaders’ ability to have 100% of teachers implement culturally competent PBIS.
The questions that guide this study are as follows:
1. By the end of the 2020 academic year, to what extent did California middle and high
schools decrease the rate of exclusionary discipline practices for African American
students with and without disabilities?
2. What are the knowledge and motivations necessary for achieving the stakeholder goal
for administrators to ensure 100% of teachers implement culturally competent PBIS?
3. What is the interaction between organizational culture and context and school
administrators’ knowledge and motivation?
Organization of the Dissertation
This chapter provided the reader with the key concepts and terminology commonly found
in discussing reducing disparate rates of exclusionary discipline practices and the
implementation of a culturally competent positive behavior interventions and supports.
8
California K-12 schools’ mission, goals, stakeholders and the initial concept of the problem of
practice were introduced. Chapter Two provides a review of current literature surrounding the
scope of the study, including specific literature related to the concepts to be evaluated in the
study: recognition of knowledge, motivation factors, and organizational factors of educational
leaders. Chapter Three provides the conceptual and methodological frameworks for the intended
research as well as descriptions of the data collection instruments. Chapter four presents the
results and findings of the study. Chapter four is organized presenting the quantitative results, the
open-end survey question results, the qualitative results, the themes, answering the research
questions and the analysis of assets and needs. Chapter five discuses the recommendations for
closing the gaps in knowledge, motivation, and organization as well as a Kirkpatrick evaluation
plan.
Definitions
Disability- A disability is any physical or mental condition that substantially affects day-to-day
life. For the purposes of IDEA, a disability must adversely affect a student’s performance in
school.
School to Prison Pipeline- for the purpose of this dissertation “a disturbing national trend
wherein children are funneled out of public schools and into the juvenile and criminal justice
systems. Many of these children have learning disabilities or histories of poverty, abuse, or
neglect, and would benefit from additional educational and counseling services. Instead, they are
isolated, punished, and pushed out “(aclu.org).
PBIS (Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports)- “is an evidence-based three-tiered
framework to improve and integrate all of the data, systems, and practices affecting student
outcomes every day. PBIS creates schools where all students succeed (PBIS.org)”.
9
CRPBIS (Culturally Responsive Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports)- “is an
educational initiative grounded in local to global justice theory with the ultimate goal of
educational systems change. Using Cultural-Historical Activity Theory (CHAT) and various
types of data collection, four local schools are working with members of their communities to
identify tensions within school, pose new solutions, and test their effectiveness (crpbis.org)”.
Educational leaders- school site leaders, directors, principals, vice principals, and assistant
administrators.
Exclusionary discipline practices – “Exclusionary discipline describes any type of school
disciplinary action that removes or excludes a student from his or her usual educational setting.
Two of the most common exclusionary discipline practices at schools include suspension and
expulsion (supportiveschooldiscipline.org)”.
Cultural mismatch- “when the culture of a child's family or home is different from the culture
of your school or program. Misunderstandings or disadvantages can result when the child comes
to school (preventexpulsion.org)”.
Zero-tolerance policies- “refers to school discipline policies and practices that mandate
predetermined consequences, typically severe, punitive and exclusionary (e.g., out of school
suspension and expulsion), in response to specific types of student misbehavior—regardless of
the context or rationale for the behavior (supportiveschooldiscipline.org)”.
Disproportionality- is defined mathematically as an event, in this case punitive consequences,
that affects African American students, that is 10% more likely to occur in that group than in the
overall population. Disproportionality refers to a group's representation in a particular category
that exceeds expectations for that group or differs substantially from the representation of others
in that category.
10
Resources- a stock or supply of money, materials, reinforcers, rewards, staff, time, training, and
other assets that can be drawn on by a person or organization in order to function effectively.
Black Escalation effect- when teachers are more likely, disproportionately, suspend, expel,
black students for the same offenses committed by white students.
Restorative justice- “an alternate method of disciplining students that seeks to balance the
process between being too permissive and being too punitive. The goal of restorative justice is to
work with students (the victims and the accused) to come to a solution rather than simply
handing down punishment (edweek.org)”.
11
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
Chapter 2 outlines the literature regarding the disparate use of exclusionary discipline
practices, also known as the school-to-prison pipeline, which has criminalized impoverished,
minority, and disabled children in California K-12 schools (Christle et al., 2005; Wald & Losen,
2003). The first section describes the school-to-prison-pipeline. Section two discusses how
exclusionary discipline practices that are used as a punishment or deterrent to problem behavior
are ineffective in reducing school misconduct. In fact, this work has found that these practices
often lead to more suspensions and increased dropout rates (Christle et al., 2005). Section three
describes the most affected student populations and the proposed root causes. Section four
discusses viable solutions, such as positive behavior interventions and supports (PBIS), and
better culturally responsive positive behavior interventions and supports (CRPBIS) (American
Psychological Association Zero Tolerance Task Force, 2008; Losen, 2015). Section five details
the knowledge, motivation, and organizational (KMO) influences that create barriers to
implementing PBIS strategies.
Social Context of Exclusionary Discipline Practices
Exclusionary discipline practices are out-of-school suspensions and expulsions
(supportiveschooldiscipline.org) According to the U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil
Rights (2014), more than three million public school students were suspended in the 2011-2012
academic school year. Nationally, African American students are three times more likely to be
suspended and three and a half times more likely to be expelled than their White peers (U.S.
Department of Education Office of Civil Rights, 2014). Although children with disabilities have
protections under the special education law, African American students with disabilities are three
times more likely to be suspended or expelled than their non-disabled White counterparts
12
(Brownstein, 2010; U.S. Department of Education, 2012). These exclusionary discipline
practices in K-12 schools push children with disabilities, especially African American children,
out of school and into the prison system.
School-to-Prison Pipeline
The NAACP (2005) quotes,
“punitive and overzealous tools and approaches of the modern criminal justice system have
seeped into our schools …serving to remove children from mainstream educational
environments and funnel them onto a one-way path toward prison. The school-to-prison pipeline
is one of the most urgent challenges in education today (p.1)”
Findings (Skiba et.al., 2014) provide
“substantial evidence that the school-to-prison pipeline is not simply a metaphorical or political
concept. Rather, there is substantial research evidence supporting the claims most frequently
made concerning the STPP (p.558)”
Wilson (2014) defines the school-to-prison pipeline (STPP) as “the casual link between
educational exclusion and criminalization of youth” (p. 49). The school-to-prison pipeline refers
to this growing pattern of tracking students out of educational institutions, primarily via ―zero
tolerance policies, and, directly and/or indirectly, into the juvenile and adult criminal justice
systems. Hatt (2011) makes a case that the unequal funding of school systems around the country
in juxtaposition with the largest per capita prison population in the industrialized world
strengthens the STPP in the United States. Multiple factors (i.e., academic failure, exclusionary
discipline, and school drop-out) underwriting to the proliferation of the STPP. There are
significant racial disparities in the STPP (Tuzzolo & Hewitt, 2006). In 1998, of the students with
no prior criminal record, African Americans were six times more likely than White students to be
13
incarcerated for the same offenses (Wald & Losen, 2003). In fact, this happens so often that
researchers have coined it “the black escalation effect” (Bourgeois, 2019). Statistics from the
U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights (2014) state that African American
students make up 16% of national student enrollment, but they represent 27% of students
referred to law enforcement and 31% of in-school arrests.
To put the statistics into real life stories, the following are some of the cases that students
have been arrested for in class, suspended and expelled. Imagine you are 12 years old with
hyperactive disorder, and you warn the kids in the lunch line not to eat all the potatoes, or "I'm
going to get you.” You are suspended for two days and charged by the police for making
"terroristic threats.” You are incarcerated for two weeks while awaiting trial. Imagine you are in
primary school, you are five years old, and you get suspended from school and arrested in class
for throwing a tantrum; imagine you are a seventh grader, 13 years old and you are arrested for
burping audibly, charged with interfering with public education, and imagine you are a 6
th
grader
in honors classes and you are arrested for refusing to stand for the pledge of allegiance (Essence
Magazine, 2019; Nocella et al., 2014, Solove, 2011). To tie the statistics back in 95% percent of
out-of-school suspensions are for disruptive behavior (Losen & Skiba, 2010). In 2012, the New
York Police Department released data conveying that about five students are arrested in school
daily, disproportionately Black and Latino, and most arrests were for “disorderly conduct” (New
York Civil Liberties Union, 2012).
Zero-Tolerance Policies
Researchers have found concrete evidence demonstrating that school policy, specifically
zero-tolerance policies, promote unequal allocation of exclusionary discipline practices. Zero-
tolerance policies are a “catch all policy” and are easily overused due to the vagueness or lack of
14
definition in the way in which the law is written (Heitzeg, 2009; Nelson, 2008; Noguera, 2003).
While there is no official definition for zero tolerance, generally the term indicates that a harsh,
predefined, mandatory consequence is applied to a violation of the school rules without regard to
the seriousness of the behavior, mitigating circumstances, or the situational context (Heitzeg,
2009). In addition, zero-tolerance policies are associated with increased police and security
presence at school, metal detectors, security cameras, locker and person searches, and all the
accoutrements of formal legal control (Heitzeg, 2009; McCarter, 2017).
Administrators originally created zero-tolerance policies to address legitimate concerns
about students’ possession of illegal items at school. However, administrators now use these
policies to punish a wide variety of behaviors, including the possession of common, legal objects
(such as medication and nail clippers), truancy, and tardiness (Brownstein, 2010). Administrators
apply 97% of discipline practices to behaviors such as disrespect, clothing, insubordination, cell
phone use, and talking back; students of color are significantly overrepresented in discipline rates
for such behaviors (McCarter, 2017). Fenning and Rose (2007) note that minority students
receive suspensions for such nonviolent violations of school policies at higher rates than their
White counterparts. Heitzeg (2009) further indicated that violators of school policies—
disproportionately students of color—often receive harsh punishments, including suspensions,
expulsions, and even arrests. Taken together, these findings suggest that administrators’ use of
exclusionary discipline policies is subject to racism, bias, and institutionalized racism (Nelson,
2008).
A major issue with zero-tolerance policies is that, by the nature of their vagueness,
administrators can apply them indiscriminately, allowing for an increased application of
exclusionary discipline practices to minority students (Noguera, 2003). Unfortunately, because
15
zero-tolerance policies are so vague, it is easy to apply zero-tolerance policies to any problem
behavior. Noguera (2003) points out that the demographics -race, gender, and socioeconomic
status- of students targeted for punishment in schools are very similar to those of adults targeted
for incarceration (i.e., incarceration rates are higher for African American adults than White
adults). This similarity suggests that the disparate application of exclusionary discipline practices
to African American students may be a symptom of institutional racism. Data concerning the
disparate use of these exclusionary practices reach back to the late 1990s, yet this problem is still
pervasive 30 years later. There is much debate over the root causes of the disproportionality, and
some concerns like social-economic status, have been refuted. Cultural misunderstandings play a
role. However, the most prominent cause found in a review of the literature is the vagueness of
zero-tolerance policies.
Disproportionality and African American Students
African American students are overrepresented in the use of exclusionary discipline
practices. Historically, this issue has been recognized since 1997. In that year, a study of urban
schools revealed that African American children received more office referrals and more
suspensions than any other ethnic group (Townsend, 2000). It is critical to note that there is no
objective evidence that suggests children of color act out or are more disruptive than any other
group of students (Scheuerman, 2016). Disproportionality is defined mathematically as an event
in this case punitive consequences, that affects African American students and is 10% more
likely to occur in that group than in the overall population (Townsend, 2000; Vincent et al.,
2012). The statistics provide concrete evidence of disproportionality: African Americans make
up just over 5% of California’s public-school enrollment, but account for nearly 18% of
suspensions (EdSource, 2018). African Americans represent a small proportion of the
16
population; however, they were suspended at rates over three times that proportion (Townsend,
2000). In 2007, African American students were the most affected by exclusionary discipline,
with an alarming 42.8% suspended and 12.8% expelled in contrast to 15.6% and 1.0% of their
White peers (Vincent et al., 2012).
The present study examines this issue in California. African American students in the
state of California are burdened with a disparate application of exclusionary discipline practices.
According to the U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights in (2014), in the 2011-
2012 school year, African American male students in the state of California were suspended and
expelled at a rate of 25.62% which is significant in comparison to White male students, who
were disciplined at a rate of 10.03%. In addition, in the 2011-2012 school year, African
American female students in the state of California were suspended and expelled at a rate of
14.87% while White female students were disciplined at rate of 3.84%.
Social Economics Causes
There are many proposed causes for the misuse of exclusionary discipline practices with
African American students, including social-economic status/poverty and cultural
misunderstanding. Some researchers believe that African American children who grow up in
poverty are less prepared to meet the behavioral demands of school (Blake et al., 2010).
Evidence suggests that students from low income homes report receiving more severe
consequences for discipline infractions than those who were from high income families (Blake et
al., 2010). However, in research in which SES was controlled for, African American students
were still disciplined at higher rates than other groups (Blake et al., 2010).
17
Cultural Misunderstandings
Another proposed cause is racial discrimination, due to cultural misunderstanding
between students and teachers from different racial group (Monroe, 2005; Skiba et al., 2011).
Differences in communication styles that may be misinterpreted as disrespect by teachers who
are statistically over 80% White females (Bireda, 2002; Blake et al., 2010; National Center for
Educational Statistics, 2011). Cultural misunderstanding between black students and white
teachers is often referred to as “cultural mismatch.” In the context of a classroom, this term refers
to “unawareness of tactics, rules, nuances, and idiosyncrasies” between the two groups (Davis,
2009, p. 24). Cultural mismatch is likely to contribute to the observed uses of disparate
exclusionary discipline practices (Bireda, 2002). The way in which Africa American students
communicate with their peers can be perceived as loud and confrontational by their teachers
(Davis, 2009). Statistics suggest that African American males are often portrayed as criminals in
the media and that these instances are overrepresented by as much as 400% (BET, 2019).
Consciously or unconsciously, educational leaders may react to African American males in the
classroom in ways that are consistent with these stereotypes (Monroe, 2005). Therefore, young
African American males may be feared and avoided (Monroe, 2005). Teachers and staff who
lack understanding “may assume the harsh tones are a precursor to a physical altercation
(Johnson et al., 2017, p. 3). This type of misunderstanding can lead to suspensions for non-
threatening behaviors that may be labeled as “willful defiance” (Johnson et al., 2017). Recently
(2019) in California, Governor Gavin Newsom has attempted to address this very issue by
banning suspensions for “willful defiance” for students K-8. Although one cannot make the
assertion that educational leaders are consciously or unconsciously biased or that they rely on
18
stereotypes, theories such as culturally responsive training have been created and are affecting
change in this area (Bal et.al, 2018).
Disproportionality and African American Students with Disabilities
African American students with disabilities are even further impacted by the
disproportionality of exclusionary discipline practices. According the U.S. Department of
Education Office for Civil Rights (2014) African American students presenting disabilities are
about twice as likely to receive exclusionary discipline as White disabled pupils. In the 2011-
2012 school year, African American students with disabilities in the state of California were
suspended and expelled at a rate of 30.36%, which is disproportionally large in comparison to
the rate of 15.62% for White students with disabilities and 17.49% for all ethnicities. According
to the Disabling Punishment report (2014-2016) found that nationwide, for every 100 students
with special needs in 2015-16, white students lost 43 days to suspension, while black students
lost 121 days. “In any given school, students of color with disabilities are the most likely to
receive the harshest school sanctions” (Nocella et al., 2014, p. 156). In the 2011-2012 school
year in New York City 52.8% of black students were suspended although they made up on 31%
of the population and 32.3% of students with disabilities were suspended although they made up
12% of the population (Schlanger, 2012).
Students in U.S. schools were less likely to be suspended in 2016 than they were in 2012.
However large gaps — by race and by special education status — remain. Black students with
disabilities are the most targeted/most likely to be suspended or expelled (Barshay, 2018).
Furthermore, black males with disabilities makeup the largest group suspended. About 34
percent, or more than a third of African American males with a disability were suspended in high
school, double the rate of European American males with a disability. African American
19
students, black boys and students with disabilities were disproportionately disciplined in K-12
public schools, according to a new report from the Government Accountability Office in 2018. In
a study by Gage et al. (2019), 23% of black students with disabilities received suspensions
compared to 9% of white and Hispanic students with disabilities.
Overrepresentation
African American students are overrepresented in Special Education and placed in the
most restrictive environments with the harshest discipline practices, severely limiting their access
to an equal education. African American students are the most overrepresented group in special
education programs in nearly every state, and that disproportionate representation is most
pronounced in mental retardation (MR) and emotional disturbed (ED): African American
students are 2.88 times more likely than European American students to be labeled as MR (Skiba
et al., 2006). ED students are 10 times more likely to be removed from school than students with
other disabilities (McCarter, 2017; Merrell & Walker, 2004). Merrell and Walker (2004) cite
students label ED are more likely to be placed in restrictive settings; have higher drop-out rates;
and within three years of dropping out make up 50% of people with at least one arrest. The
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) ensures equal access to public education for
students with disabilities. Yet, many schools respond to behavior infractions by suspending
students with disabilities, thus removing them from the educational environment, leading legal
scholars to suggest that disciplinary exclusion represents de facto denial of educational access
and therefore is discriminatory and illegal (Sullivan et al., 2014). The new Individuals with
Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA) and the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) for
schools and educators accountable for the overrepresentation of minority children in special
education and aim to limit suspensions and expulsions leading to higher drop-out rates however
20
the overrepresentation of African American students in special education still persists. “There is
a strong correlation between special education placement and school push-out and or drop-out”
(Nocella et al., 2014, p. 155).
African American children with disabilities are targeted for the most extreme
exclusionary disciplinary actions, such as suspension, expulsion, and referrals to law
enforcement (Skiba, 2014; Wald & Losen, 2003). African American students with disabilities do
not receive equal access to educational environments because of their disproportional placement
in restrictive special education classrooms and the disparate use of suspensions and expulsions
(Sullivan et al., 2014). Laws and court cases such as Brown vs. Board, Hobson vs. Hansen,
IDEA, and Larry P. Riles should protect African American students with disabilities from
overrepresentation, limited access to education, and exclusionary discipline practices, however
there is significant evidence to the contrary (Sullivan et al., 2014). Many researchers suggest that
while African American students are overrepresented in Special Education, they are
underrepresented in services and support. Morgan (2007) contends that between white students
and black students who present with the same behavioral issues and learning difficulties, black
students are less likely to get an individualized education program. In addition, many
suspensions result in the loss of critical services such as mental health counseling.
Ineffectiveness of Exclusionary Discipline Practices
Exclusionary discipline practices, such as suspension and expulsion, are not effective in
reducing behavior problems and instead lead to further exclusion from school and higher dropout
rates (Boneshefski & Runge, 2013; Christle et al., 2005; Skiba, 2014; Skiba et al., 2011).
Researchers Christle et al. (2005) assert exclusionary discipline, “despite its frequent use, it is
not effective in reducing the behavior problems it is intended to address” (p. 70). In the field of
21
Applied Behavior Analysis, a consequence is only called “punishment” if it decreases the
occurrence of future behavior (Skinner, 1938). Therefore, a common misconception about
exclusionary discipline is that students will “learn” from the “punishment.” However, suspension
and expulsion do not decrease problem behavior. Thus, this strategy is an ineffective punisher. In
fact, it might reinforce the behavior of a student who is struggling academically, behaviorally,
and or socially, who would rather avoid unpleasant situations at school. This makes exclusionary
discipline counterproductive. Research asserts that juvenile delinquency, suspensions, and
expulsions increase the number, types, duration, timing, and severity of risks that increase the
likelihood that a youth will engage in antisocial behavior (Christle et al., 2005; Skiba, 2014).
Moreover, following removal from school, students often experience enormous difficultly
reentering and are more prone to dropping out. “Students returning from long suspensions or
expulsions, from residential placements, or from secure facilities are at particular risk of school
failure and dropping out” (Wald & Losen, 2003, p. 13). Exclusionary discipline does not
effectively address problem behavior. In contrast, suspensions and expulsions are often
predictors of further exclusion, dropouts, and antisocial behavior (Morrison & Skiba, 2001). The
American Psychological Association Zero Tolerance Task Force (2008), Gonzalez (2012), and
Skiba et al. (2011) contend that exclusionary practices impede educational improvement and are
ineffective in reducing problem behaviors. Moreover, a number of researchers posit that children
do not learn from the practices and that the practices lead to further intense problems such as
academic failure, school dropout, and increased contact with the juvenile justice system
(Boneshefski & Runge, 2013; Skiba, 2014; Skiba et al., 2011). These children need educational
opportunities to learn appropriate behaviors and align themselves with appropriate school
conduct (Redfield & Nance, 2016). Research indicating that exclusionary discipline practices are
22
not effective in reducing school misconduct should become a catalyst for change for educational
leaders, school psychologist, and school administrators.
Alternatives to Exclusionary Discipline
Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS)
Many psychologists and behavioral health professionals advise against the inappropriate
use of exclusionary discipline (punishment) practices and advocate for the use of positive
behavioral support practices (American Psychological Association Zero Tolerance Task Force,
2008; Civil Rights Project UCLA, 2000). According to American Psychological Association
Zero Tolerance Task Force (2008), codes of conduct should be written to promote positive adult
and student behaviors and should include a graduated system of responses to student misconduct
that holds youth responsible for their actions but makes it clear that removal from school is the
last resort. Students with problem behavior need to be in school to learn appropriate academic
and prosocial behaviors. High suspension rates do not improve learning conditions. Researchers
assert that it goes without saying that time spent learning is likely one of the strongest predictors
of achievement (Redfield & Nance, 2016).
PBIS were designed with the reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Act of
1997 (IDEA) and the Center on PBIS was established to disseminate information and
implementation strategies (Sugai & Simonsen, 2012). Saffan and Oswald (2003) note that IDEA
requires local school districts not only to use the PBIS framework for students with disabilities
but also for students whose behavior places them at risk for placement in a special education
program. Although originally designed to provide support for students with behavioral
disabilities, the framework is used now to implement behavior support for all students (Sugai &
Homer, 2009; Sugai & Simonsen, 2012). Fenning and Rose (2007) suggest that PBIS was
23
developed and endorsed by the federal government in response to the failed attempts to utilize
zero-tolerance policies and exclusionary discipline approaches on the part of school leaders.
PBIS is an international, preventative framework that has been adopted by schools and school
districts to teach and promote positive behaviors for all students (Clonan et al., 2007; Sugai &
Homer, 2006, 2009). Upreti et al. (2010) identify six hallmarks of the PBIS framework: a pre-
implementation agreement by at least 80% of the school’s staff; three tiers of support for all
students, proactive behavior principles based on evidence and data, use of a student reward
system, development of community support for the framework, and use of student and school
data to make decisions about behavior programming and interventions.
PBIS teach appropriate behaviors (McCarter, 2017; Taylor, 2012). School-wide PBIS
have been linked with an overall reduction in suspension and expulsion rates and therefore
present a viable solution (American Psychological Association Zero Tolerance Task Force, 2008;
Civil Rights Project UCLA, 2000; Losen, 2015; McCarter, 2017; Taylor, 2012). Additionally,
school wide PBIS are appealing because they are widely implemented and do not require
additional resources (Losen, 2015; McCarter, 2017). PBIS is a strong alternative but it still has
flaws. Therefore, although it appears to be a viable solution, it is still lacking. Many researchers
agree that PBIS is a good foundation but for increased equitable outcomes, it works best when
combined with other strategies.
Culturally Responsive Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (CRPBIS)
Although PBIS present a viable alternative, there is still insufficient evidence to suggest
that PBIS addresses the depth and scope of the entire problem, namely racial disparity. Even
after implementing school wide PBIS, the rate of exclusionary discipline practices among
African American children remains high (Kourea et al., 2016). However, when PBIS are
24
combined with culturally responsive training, the combination is highly effective in reducing the
disparate rate of exclusionary discipline practices and improving overall school climate and
safety (Losen, 2015). Culturally responsive PBIS (CRPBIS), although still in the beginning
stages of implementation, have major implications for resolving disproportionality. The CRPBIS
framework operationalizes cultural responsiveness as an inclusive decision-making process (Bal,
2018). Recent research has provided evidence of CRPBIS’ effectiveness. For example, the
Learning Lab examined use of a learning lab as a new methodology to create systematic change
regarding behavioral outcomes and school discipline (Bal et al., 2014). The Learning Lab was
designed to facilitate authentic collaboration among stakeholders: educators, community-based
organizations, parents, and families. With the support of the CRPBIS center in Wisconsin, the
researchers implemented a learning lab at an elementary school in Lilehammer School District
from the 2012-2013 school year. The results yielded two interrelated themes that entailed both
challenges and possibilities for learning lab implementation. The first theme was the concept of
building inclusivity within a bureaucratic institution. A second theme was the shift from deficit
to expansive discourse. The use of a learning lab presented a space for continual reflection on
disproportionality and educational practices, which then guided systemic policies changes. More
importantly, it included the voices of nondominant parents and communities who are typically
excluded from those processes. Overall, the lab was successful and provided a much-needed
service.
Subsequent research has also provided a platform for nondominant parents, specifically
African American parents, to increase cultural responsiveness to teaching school wide PBIS.
Specifically, Kourea et al. (2016) utilized ethnographic interviews with three African American
mothers who had children in kindergarten and had been identified by classroom educational
25
leaders as experiencing behavioral difficulties. The descriptive aspects of the interviews yielded
six major themes: responsibility; safety; family interactions; respect; school family interactions;
and community family interactions (Kourea et al., 2016). Results from the ethnographic
interviews were used to create a lesson plan for teaching behavioral expectations, including
issues such as not touching others’ belongings and keeping an arms-length space from others to
show respect (Kourea et al., 2016). The social validity score of this program was highly ranked
by the school wide PBIS core team members (Kourea et al., 2016). The school wide PBIS
program took the lessons from the ethnographic interviews and incorporated them into lesson
plans with visual demonstrations, skill building, reviews, role-playing, opportunities to reflect,
and reinforcement (Kourea et al., 2016). When PBIS were combined with other interventions
that were culturally responsive, they were more effective in reducing suspensions for this
targeted population (Bal, 2018; Kourea et al., 2016). Although effective, there is limited research
and application of CRPBIS in schools. However, Johnson et al. (2017) deems a culturally
responsive adaptation of PBIS necessary.
School-Wide Positive Restorative Discipline (SWPRD)
Another extremely beneficial viable alternative as cited by authors Vincent, Inglish,
Girvan, Sprague, and McCabe (2016) is the combination of PBIS and restorative justice also
known as School-wide Positive and Restorative Discipline (SWPRD). Restorative justice builds
positive teacher-student and peer relationships. With a focus on fairness, procedural justice and
involving the community to help problem solve. Restorative justice practices include community
circles, affective and affirmative communication, active listening, and accepting and refraining
from changing other’s perspectives (Vincent et.al, 2016). SWPRD is a blended approach,
conceptualizing restorative justice/discipline along a three-tiered continuum. At the universal
26
level there are restorative justice circles to teach students behavioral agreement (Vincent et.al,
2016). The second and third tiers discussed disciplinary incidents with the whole class or smaller
circles with just the key stakeholders.
The study by Vincent el.al (2016) yielded positive results for African American students
in that it reduced and or completely eliminated office discipline referrals (ODR). The results also
reflected significant positive results for other populations including Native Americans, Latinx,
and LBGTQ students. For African American students specifically, prior to SWPRD
implementation, African American students made up 22% of the ORDs, after SWPRD, African
American students made up zero percent of the ORDs. The authors quoted “the outcomes of our
study are promising (p.128)”. Vincent et.al (2016) advocates for and deems SWPRD a promising
way to “strengthen the capacity of school-wide discipline systems to reduce disparities in
discipline outcomes across students from vulnerable groups (p.130)”.
Gap Analysis Conceptual Framework
Clark and Estes (2008) provide a systematic analysis and framework for assessing the
gaps in KMO barriers that hinder an organization’s performance. A gap analysis is a critical first
step in determining whether individuals know how to achieve their goals or what gaps in
knowledge may contribute to their lack of success (Clark & Estes, 2008). Productivity is
contingent upon whether a stakeholder possesses the knowledge and skills necessary to perform
their job or to achieve their stakeholder goal (Clark & Estes, 2008). There are four main types of
knowledge: factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive (Krathwohl, 2002; Rueda, 2011).
The second step is to determine which, if any, motivational influences hinder performance,
which include the following: choice in pursuing the goal, persistence to keep going until the goal
is achieved, and putting forth the necessary mental effort to reach the objective. There are six
27
major motivational areas of research: self-efficacy, value, interest, attributions, goals and goal
orientation, and emotions. The third step is to evaluate which, if any, organizational influences,
cultural models, and cultural settings, such as work processes, lack of resources, or attitudes, are
preventing optimal stakeholder performance (Clark & Estes, 2008; Hirbayashi, n.d.).
A KMO gap analysis conceptual framework will be applied to educational
leaders/stakeholder’s knowledge, motivation, and organizational needs to achieve their
performance goals for implementing PBIS in their classrooms by September 2020. The first
section will address assumed influences on knowledge and/or skills. The second section will
assess potential motivational influences that act as barriers to achievement of the stakeholder’s
goals. The last section will discuss proposed organizational influences. The KMO influences will
then be evaluated using methodology described in Chapter 3.
The discussion will highlight the knowledge and motivation influences related to
reducing disparate use of exclusionary discipline practices in California K-12 schools and the
evidence-based solution of implementing culturally competent PBIS instead of the using
exclusionary discipline practices. The stakeholder goal that guides this study the following: by
September 2020, 100% of educational leaders will implement culturally competent PBIS with
students. PBIS is increasingly popular in California K-12 schools however there are some
barriers to progress on this issue when implementing it to address the needs of African American
students with and without disabilities. The scholarly literature review presents two common
areas of focus when achieving stakeholder goals: knowledge and motivation (Clark & Estes,
2008; Krathwohl, 2002; Mayer, 2011; Rueda, 2011).
28
Knowledge
The first area of focus related to stakeholder goal achievement is knowledge.
Stakeholders must possess the knowledge (and skills) necessary to increase engagement and
ultimately achieve their goals (Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009; Carpenter, 2012; Clark & Estes, 2008;
Krathwohl, 2002; Mayer, 2011; Rueda, 2011). Clark and Estes (2008) assert that by identifying
the depth and scope of stakeholders’ knowledge and skills, one can gain insight into
stakeholders’ ultimate success in performing their jobs and achieving their goals. A gap analysis
is a critical first step in both determining whether individuals know how to achieve their goals
and identifying potential gaps in knowledge that may affect their success (Clark & Estes, 2008).
The researcher will evaluate whether there exist gaps in knowledge or motivation that serve as
barriers to educational leaders’ implementation of culturally competent PBIS (Clark & Estes,
2008).
The four main types of knowledge are factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive
(Krathwohl, 2002; Rueda, 2011). Factual knowledge refers to individual facts that are discrete
and isolated content elements (Krathwohl, 2002). Conceptual knowledge refers to the ability to
combine facts and to understand complex information and organized forms of knowledge
(Krathwohl, 2002). Factual and conceptual knowledge make up declarative knowledge, which
refers to knowing information (as opposed to skills). Procedural knowledge is knowledge about
how to do something (Krathwohl, 2002). Metacognitive knowledge refers to an awareness of and
knowledge about one’s own cognition; that is, thinking about one’s own thinking (Krathwohl,
2002).
Educational leaders, school psychologist, teachers, and staff may lack—or perceive that
they lack—the knowledge required to effectively decrease suspension rates for African
29
American students with and without disabilities. The problem of practice-disparate exclusionary
discipline rates for African American students with and without disabilities- has been a
discussion for decades with many different strategies, literature, and policies implemented yet in
conclusion relatively small gains or progress made. Thirteen years ago, in 2007, nationally
African American students were suspended at a rate more than 2.5 times higher than their white
counterparts, and in 2019, African American students in California alone, are suspended at a rate
3 times higher than their white counterparts (Vincent et al., 2012)
Conceptual Knowledge of Best Practices
The lack of knowledge in the education field regarding best practices for reducing
suspension and expulsion among African American students with and without disabilities could
extend to educational leaders. Extensive literature has addressed the school-to-prison-pipeline
(6,326 articles, 10,663 newspaper articles, and 303 books in the USC library) and disparate
exclusionary discipline practices (13,217 articles, 833 newspaper articles, and 1,010 books at
USC); however, there is a lack of knowledge on how to fix the problem. The researcher found
only 80 articles and two newspaper articles upon searching: “(administrators or educational) and
decreasing suspensions for (‘African American’ or Black) students with and without disabilities”
using the USC library databases. Therefore, there is a lack of knowledge, research, and
consensus on this issue. According to Ladson-Billings (1999), research on good teaching in
historically underserved classrooms, effective teachers of African American children,
multicultural teaching, and how to prepare teachers for diversity is “thin, poorly developed,” and
provides an “inaccurate picture of the kind of preparation teachers” need (p. 114).
Williams Shealey (2009) addressed the lack of preparation of educational leaders
entering the field in addressing students of color. A group of African American students
30
obtaining their doctorate in special education cited cultural mismatch between teachers and
students as a main reason they decided to enter the field. One participant in Williams Shealey’s
(2009) study explained her concerns that some of the issue’s teachers were having with the
students could easily be viewed as normal behavior in the African American community. All the
students reported that they were obtaining their doctorates to make a greater impact on all
students, particularly students of color, and that they wanted to train teachers to work more
effectively with African American students (Williams Shealey, 2009). Similarly, Sleeter (2001)
noted that: “many preservice as well as in-service teachers are ambivalent about their ability to
teach African American children, and their feelings of efficacy seem to decline from the
preservice to the in-service stage” (p. 95). Based on the extant research, educational leaders and
teachers struggle with identifying best practices for reducing disparate rates of exclusionary
discipline practices among African American students with and without disabilities.
Procedural Knowledge of How to Overcome Barriers to Implementation
In addition to a lack of knowledge regarding best practices, there is not enough research
on the effective implementation of PBIS in middle schools and high schools. For example,
Bradshaw et al. (2015) noted that there is limited research on PBIS in high schools. Losen (2015)
also acknowledged that the bulk of existing research on PBIS was conducted on elementary
schools and there is an urgent need for research on secondary schools where racial disparities are
more pronounced. Some factors creating a barrier to implementation for high schools are
leadership and buy-in (Bradshaw et al., 2015). Bradshaw et al. (2015) also suggested that,
because high schools are larger and more diverse than elementary schools, they have a higher
level of disorder, making it increasingly difficult to implement PBIS (Bradshaw et al., 2015).
31
Again, given that there is a clear lack of research on this subject in the field of education, it is
reasonable to assume that this lack of knowledge extends to educational leaders.
The California K–12 school administrators’ goal is by September 2020; school
administrators will ensure 100% of teachers implement culturally responsive positive behavior
interventions and supports (CRPBIS) with students. Table 2 depicts the two knowledge
influences that correspond to this stakeholder goal of school administrators’ implementation of
CRPBIS in California middle and high schools.
Table 2
California K–12 School Administrators’ Knowledge Relevant to PBIS Implementation
Knowledge Influence Knowledge Type Assessment
Identify best practices for reducing disparate
rates of exclusionary discipline for African
American students with and without
disabilities
Declarative Surveys, Interviews,
Identify how to overcome barriers to
implementing PBIS in middle schools and
high schools
Procedural Interviews, Surveys
Motivation
The second area of focus is motivation. Motivation is what drives a person to start,
continue, and successfully complete a task (Rueda, 2011). It is a key factor in achieving
stakeholder goals (Mayer, 2011). Motivation affects the likelihood that stakeholders achieve
their goals; research indicates that over 50% of problems related to achieving stakeholder goals
are problems of motivation. Three common problems of motivation are choice, persistence, and
mental effort (Clark & Estes, 2008; Mayer, 2011; Rueda, 2011).
32
Some contributions to motivation include self-efficacy, value, interest, attributions, goals
and goal orientation, and emotions. First, the self-efficacy theory by Bandura focuses on the
extent to which one believes one can successfully complete a task (Bandura, 2000; Pajares,
2009). Second, the expectancy value theory centers around the value people assign to tasks
(Eccles, 2006). Third, the interest theory focuses on individuals’ level of interest in the task at
hand (Shraw & Lehman, 2009). Fourth, the attribution theory revolves around the causes and
effects of behavior and an individual’s ability to control outcomes or the environment
(Anderman & Anderman, 2006). Fifth, the goal theory centers on the construction of goals and
how goal construction can affect success. Under the goal orientation theory, people either
possess performance goals (which involve the motivation to outcompete others) or mastery goals
(motivation to outperform their own prior performances; Yough & Anderman, 2006). Sixth, the
emotions theory concerns emotions and their connections to motivation (Pintrich, 2003).
Through an analysis of the literature self-efficacy theory and expectancy value theory are
the lenses best suited for examining PBIS. While there is a dearth of literature on school
administrators, one article does discuss the lack of value and self-efficacy educational leaders
have in terms of implementing PBIS (McIntosh et al., 2016).
Self-Efficacy Theory
Self-efficacy is an essential skill for administrators to reach their stakeholder goal of
ensuring that 100% of teachers implement all three tiers of PBIS and thus effectively change the
school climate and promote proportionality and equity in school discipline practices. Many
researchers have investigated principal leadership and correlations to student achievement
through the principal’s influence on school culture and on teachers’ efficacy. For example,
addressing educational leadership, Witzers et al. (2003) stated: “studies demonstrate that
33
educational leadership is related to school organization and culture” (p. x). In a qualitative study
on educational leaders’ support or lack thereof for PBIS, educational leaders indicated that
witnessing unsupportive staff hinders their support (McIntosh et al., 2016). Therefore,
educational leaders need to have enough self-efficacy / confidence in implementing PBIS to
function as role models and to positively influence teachers’ self-efficacy.
Research suggests that administrators’ and teachers’ self-efficacy increases when they
use research-based behavior management methods and PBIS (Brophy & McCaslin, 1992;
Johnson et al., n.d.). The practice, commitment, and eventual mastery of PBIS can increase
teachers’ self-efficacy, cognition, metacognition, motivation, persistence, and mental effort.
However, administrators must first have the self-efficacy to ensure that 100% of teachers
implement all three tiers of PBIS. Teachers with high self-efficacy levels report using long-term
strategies to manage problem behavior (Brophy & McCaslin, 1992). Teachers have reported that
implementation of PBIS led to increases in their classroom management efficacy (Johnson et al.,
n.d.). Eighty percent of teachers reported that PBIS allowed them to increase behavioral
expectations (Johnson et al., n.d.). Moreover, the teachers realized that punitive actions and
punishment were not effective in changing student behavior. By consistently practicing PBIS,
teachers were able to see positive changes in their classroom management (Johnson et al., n.d.).
Expectancy Value Theory
Educational leaders need to value equity, diversity, and inclusion. “Effective leaders
recognize, respect, and employ each student's strengths, diversity, and culture as assets for
teaching and learning” (NPBEA, 2015, p. 11). Extensive research has addressed advocating and
communicating the importance of equity, diversity, and inclusion at the college level. Although
many more recent court-rulings have overturned policies such as affirmative action. However,
34
much remains to be understood at the K–12 level. Diversity is touted as a value in many cases
however without the policy and practices need to sustain it. Therefore, underlying inequities
continue persist, especially and extending within education starting with K-12, where important
steps for achieving social mobility occur (Mikulyuk & Braddock, 2018). Therefore, one may
argue that diversity still needs to be effectively “managed” to ensure equitable outcomes
(Thomas, 1990).
In promoting inclusion for special needs children researchers Wakeman et.al. (2003)
found that 92% of educational leaders have no experience and or background in special
education. This creates a huge knowledge gap for educational leaders in promoting inclusion.
Moreover, Wood et al. (2012) highlighted the importance of the principal’s attitudes and beliefs
regarding school culture. Bailey and Du Plessis (1997) stated that educational leaders at the K–
12 level feel that inclusion is good for students with disabilities, but not necessarily their peers.
This belief that equity, diversity, and inclusion is important only for some populations of
students can stifle progress from theoretical notions to actual implementation and practice.
Educational leaders struggle with their own values and with creating safe, supportive schools for
all (Wood et al., 2012). To further exacerbate the problem, extant research has not yet accorded
enough attention to educational leaders’ role in creating safe and inclusive school climates
(Wood et al., 2012).
Educational leaders and administrators need to place more value on decreasing
suspensions and expulsions for African American students with and without disabilities. Again,
there is little to no research on whether educational leaders value decreasing exclusionary
discipline for this population of students. However, there is some research about how educational
leaders and teachers view the contributing factors behind the disproportionality. For example,
35
Heilbrun et al. (2015) determined that educational leaders’ support for zero tolerance policies
was positively associated with suspension rates, holding school-level demographic factors
constant: “School suspensions were higher in schools where educational leaders endorsed the
view that zero tolerance disciplinary policies helped maintain order in their schools” (Heilbrun et
al., 2015, p. 495).
In addition, Gage et al. (2019) explained that only 10% of teachers interviewed in their
study on the discipline gap and African American overrepresentation believed that race and
culture play into a teacher’s beliefs (including racial profiling, unconscious bias, or differential
treatment) and classroom practices; the authors argued that this phenomenon contributes to the
discipline gap. Sleeter (2008), and Howard and Gay (n.d.) also highlighted this cultural
mismatch, finding that a handful of white teachers resist examining long-held beliefs and exhibit
“little understanding of discrimination, especially racism, and of how racism works in schools
and society” and about “how it is reproduced daily” (p. 560). Moreover Sleeter (2008) asserted
that these same teachers:
bring virtually no conceptual framework for understanding visible inequalities rather than
the dominant deficit framework . . . generally ignorant of communities of color, fear
them and fear discussing race and racism,” and “lack awareness of themselves as cultural
beings. (p. 560)
Zero tolerance policies, coupled with implicit biases, contribute to disparate rates of exclusionary
discipline practices for African American students with and without disabilities. Overall, then,
the values and beliefs of educational leaders and teachers run contradictory to reducing
suspensions and expulsions for this population of students. It thus appears that educational
leaders may lack the motivation and or grit to positively effect change in their school climate to
36
implement a culturally competent PBIS. This lack of motivation (and subsequent lack of
knowledge about culturally competent applications of PBIS) increases the likelihood that
educational leaders will struggle to achieve their stakeholder goal of 100% of teachers
implementing culturally responsive PBIS.
Table 3 displays the organizational mission and global goal, the stakeholder goal, and the
corresponding two motivation influences necessary to address the motivational gap related to
educational leaders implementing PBIS and reducing the disparate use of exclusionary discipline
practices in California K-12 schools.
37
Table 3
Motivation Influences, Motivation Types, and Motivation Assessment
Topic Detail
Dissertation model Evaluation
Organizational
mission
The mission of California K-12 Schools is to uphold federal and
state laws in accordance with Section 504 of Rehabilitation Act,
Americans with Disabilities Act and IDEA in that it prohibits
discrimination against people with disabilities in programs that
receive federal financial assistance and further compliance with
the law protects children and adults with disabilities from
exclusion and unequal treatment in schools, jobs, and the
community (dredf.org).
Organizational
global goal
By the end of the school year 2020, reduce the rate of suspensions
and expulsions for African American students without disabilities
by 5% (i.e., from the current rate of 9.1% to 4% or less) and for
African American students with disabilities by 13 % (i.e., from
30% in 2012 to 17% or less).
Stakeholder Goal By September 2020, school administrators will ensure 100% of
educational leaders will implement culturally competent PBIS
with students.
Assumed motivation
influences
Administrators need to feel efficacious in their ability to
implement all three tiers of positive behavior interventions and
supports strategies at the middle and high school level.
Administrators need to value diversity, inclusion, and equity.
Administrators need to value decreasing suspension and expulsion
for African American and African American students with
disabilities.
Motivational
influence assessment
Questionnaires
Interviews
38
Organization
Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis suggests that organizational influences are
important to address. Although Clark and Estes called their work a KMO gap analysis, Clark has
noted that these influences follow a different order of importance than the name suggests:
motivation, organization, and knowledge (Clark, n.d.). For educational leaders to achieve their
stakeholder goal of 100% implementation of PBIS, organizational culture must change to
support achievement in conjunction with knowledge and motivation influences. This section
addresses general theory regarding organizational culture in the form of a literature review, then
applies this theory specifically to educational leaders in California middle schools and their goal
acquisition.
General Organizational Theory
Organizational culture is an abstract concept that provides contour and structure for
cognition within an organization (Schein, 2004). Once stakeholders are motivated both
individually and collectively, organizational culture supports the change process and, ultimately,
the ability to sustain the desired change (Kezar, 2001). Organizational culture is apparent from
three different lenses: espoused values and beliefs, artifacts, and basic underlying assumptions
(Schein, 2004). Espoused beliefs are the articulated beliefs that are shared among all group
members (Schein, 2004). Artifacts are behaviors, physical environments, rituals, and language
and can also relate to the climate/culture of the organization (Schein, 2004). Basic underlying
assumptions represent the unconscious, deeply held beliefs that shape behavior and feelings
(Schein, 2004). Basic underlying assumptions are the hardest to address (Schein, 2004),
especially when an organization has a strong culture.
39
The strongest and most successful organizations are adaptable and innovative (Senge,
1990). Many researchers believe learning organizations are the epitome of success (Garvin et al.,
2008; Schwandt & Marquardt, 1999; Senge, 1990). An adaptive learning environment can be
cultivated and can thrive in an organization that is committed to psychological safety, promotes
diversity of thought and a culture of inquiry, and maintains a systems approach that
acknowledges the complex and connected nature of the world and its problems (Schein, 2004).
Cultural Models
Cultural models are the values, beliefs, and attitudes that are generally invisible and
automated (Hirbayashi, n.d.). Through the lens of a socio-culture framework, cultural models
represent the internal beliefs and values present in an organization. Cultural models are often
recognized as barriers, yet if adopted in union with knowledge and motivation, they can also
become opportunities for positive organizational growth (Hirbayashi, n.d.). Cultural models may
include, but are not limited to, the following: constant competition, dishonesty, helplessness,
negative attitude, resistance to change, authoritarian leadership, and lack of trust (Hirbayashi,
n.d.). This section will review the literature related to cultural models present in Southern
California middle schools. These models may be barriers or assets to stakeholder goal
achievement, including negative attitudes towards PBIS and resistance to change.
Multicultural Norms
All stakeholders need to promote a sense of value in creating multicultural school norms
to prevent an organizational barrier to the implementation of CRPBIS. It is important that school
values reflect and translate into diverse groups. This diverse environment occurs when schools
go beyond general learning principles to multicultural education and cultural competency. Fine
et al. (1997) suggested that a dialogue of cultural difference needs to occur at the classroom
40
level, and that this discourse must include acknowledgement of differences and reflection about
how these standards of behavior have been established, their purposes, and their outcomes.
Further dialogue is needed to establish specific examples of acceptable and unacceptable
behaviors in mutual agreement. Bal (2018) asserted that soliciting parental input as well as input
from the students is a key component of CRPBIS. Many schools are implementing PBIS but
neglecting the culturally responsive aspect necessary in the creation of multicultural school
norms.
Cultural Settings
Cultural settings are the visible manifestations, outcomes, or results of the cultural
models (Hirbayashi, n.d.). These settings can be physically viewed, observed, or studied.
Cultural settings may include, but are not limited to, the following: no goals present, vague or
constantly changing performance goals or feedback, lack of incentives, lack of role models,
restrictive rules or policies, lack of autonomy, lack of communication, lack of resources, and
high employee turnover (Hirbayashi, n.d.). This section reviews literature related to specific
cultural settings at Southern California middle schools. These settings may be barriers or assets
to stakeholder goal achievement, such as restrictive policies that do not incorporate enough time
for educational leaders or a lack of collaboration/communication.
Resources
A potential organizational barrier is access to resources. Clark and Estes (2008) stated
that effective change efforts ensure that all stakeholders have the resources (e.g.,
reinforcement/rewards, time, training, personnel) necessary to complete their job, and that, in the
event of resource shortages, existing resources are aligned with organizational priorities.
Organizational effectiveness increases when leaders ensure that employees have the resources,
41
they need to achieve an organizational goal. Waters et al. (2003) noted that meeting staff
resource needs correlates with improved student learning outcomes. Specific to the problem at
hand, extant research has shown that educational leaders and teachers do not have adequate time
to focus on the implementation of CRPBIS and or PBIS. McIntosh et al. (2016) reported that
many educational leaders have a negative reaction to the time commitment necessary to
implement school-wide positive behavior interventions and supports (SWPBIS). According to
Chitiyo and Wheeler (2009), teachers also indicated that time constraints had the most
pronounced effect on their ability to implement PBIS. Educational leaders and teachers often do
not have the time in their schedules to implement PBIS. This represents a significant
organizational barrier. For educational leaders to achieve their goal of 100% implementation of
CRPBIS, this barrier must be addressed. If this barrier is confirmed to be objective, rather than
due to subjective perceptions, schools should create a cultural setting that supports PBIS. A
policy that provides educational leaders with adequate time to work on and incorporate PBIS in
their daily routine/classroom management schedule would be beneficial.
Table 4 displays the organizational mission and global goal, the stakeholder goal, and the
three corresponding organizational influences identified to address the extent to which
organizational barriers affect educational leaders’ ability to implement PBIS and reduce the
disparate use of exclusionary discipline practices in California K-12 schools.
42
Table 4
Organizational Influences, Organizational Types, and Organizational Assessment
Topic Detail
Dissertation
model
Evaluation
Organizational
mission
The mission of California K-12 Schools is to uphold federal
and state laws in accordance with Section 504 of Rehabilitation
Act, Americans with Disabilities Act and IDEA in that it
prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities in
programs that receive federal financial assistance and further
compliance with the law protects children and adults with
disabilities from exclusion and unequal treatment in schools,
jobs, and the community (dredf.org).
Organizational
global goal
By the end of the school year 2020, reduce the rate of
suspensions and expulsions for African American students
without disabilities by 5% (i.e., from the current rate of 9.1% to
4% or less) and for African American students with disabilities
by 13 % (i.e., from 30% in 2012 to 17% or less).
Stakeholder
Goal
By September 2020, school administrators will ensure 100% of
teachers and staff will implement culturally competent PBIS
with students.
Assumed
organizational
influences
(Cultural Models)
All stakeholders need to promote a sense of value in creating
multicultural school norms.
(Cultural Settings)
Schools need the resources necessary to ensure all staff and
teachers have the training and tools required to implement
PBIS with fidelity.
Organizational
influence
assessment
Questionnaires/surveys
Interviews
43
Summary
This evaluation study seeks to identify gaps in knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences at California middle schools that may affect the goal of 100% implementation of PBIS
by 2020. To inform this study, Chapter 2 has reviewed the literature regarding the school-to-
prison pipeline, the disparate use of exclusionary discipline practices and the use of PBIS,
CRPBIS and SWPRD as viable alternatives. For the gap analysis, the knowledge influences
identified in this chapter were declarative, in that educational leaders need to understand how to
overcome barriers to implementing PBIS at the middle and high school level and they need to
know best practices for reducing disparate exclusionary discipline rates for African American
students with and without disabilities. The motivation influences that were described included
self-efficacy theory, specifically that educational leaders need to be self-efficacious in their
ability to implement PBIS, and value-theory, in that educational leaders need to value equity,
diversity, and inclusion and they also need to value decreasing suspensions and expulsions for
African American students with and without disabilities. The organizational influences discussed
in this chapter include lack educational leaders must allocate resources to better achieve their
stakeholder goal and they must value multicultural norms. Chapter 3 describes the validation
process for these influences.
44
CHAPTER 3: METHODS
The first section reminds the reader of the purpose of the study and the research
questions. This chapter is designed to inform the reader of the research design, conceptual
framework, methodology, population and sampling, methods for data collection and analysis,
ethics, reliability, validity, credibility, and trustworthiness, and the limitations and delimitations.
The following sections will be presented in the order listed above.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the degree to which California middle and high
schools achieve their goal of reducing suspension and expulsion rates for African American
students with and without disabilities. The study explores the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences related to achieving this goal, focusing specifically on school
administrators.
The questions that guide this study are as follows:
1. By the end of the 2020 academic year, to what extent did California middle schools
and high schools decrease the rate of exclusionary discipline practices for African
American students with and without disabilities?
2. What are the knowledge and motivations necessary for achieving the stakeholder goal
for administrators to ensure 100% of teachers implement culturally competent PBIS?
3. What is the interaction between organizational culture and context and school
administrators’ knowledge and motivation?
Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of Stakeholders’ Knowledge and Motivation and
the Organizational Context
The conceptual framework discussed in this study is used as an explanation of the
interaction and relationships between the various factors represented in a study (Maxwell, 2013).
45
A conceptual framework situated in the body of previous knowledge can contribute by validating
previous research and creating organic research (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The conceptual
framework rationalizes the research and appropriate methods for answering the research
questions (Maxwell, 2011). In the context of this study the conceptual framework is related to
disparate use of exclusionary discipline practices in Southern California middle and high schools
and the positive behavior interventions and supports as a method to decrease the rate of
suspension and expulsions among African American and disabled children.
Clark and Estes Gap Analysis (2008) look at the potential barriers to progress, in this
study specifically, the knowledge, motivation, and organizational barriers to implementing
Positive behavior interventions and supports thus administrators achieving their stakeholder goal.
It is important to note that the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences do not
operate in isolation and instead they are multidimensional and interactive in this process (Clark
& Estes, 2008).
46
Figure 1
Interactive KM
Figure 1 represents the administrators’ as stakeholders’ knowledge and motivation within
the larger organization interacting with upon each other influencing the outcome of the
stakeholder goal. The large blue circle represents the organization, Southern California middle
100% of administrators will implement culturally competent Positive behavior
interventions and supports
Southern California Middle Schools
Cultural Model Influence: All stakeholders need to promote a
sense of value in creating multicultural school norms
Cultural Setting Influence: Schools need the resources
necessary to ensure all staff and teachers have the training and
tools required to implement PBIS with fidelity.
¢
Knowledge Influences:
Identify best practices for
implementing PBIS for
African American students
and African American
students with disabilities.
Identify how to overcome
barriers to implementing
PBIS in middle schools and
high schools.
Motivation Influences:
Administrators need to feel efficacious in
their ability to implement all three tiers
of positive behavior interventions and
supports strategies at the middle and high
school level.
Administrators need to value diversity,
inclusion, and equity.
Administrators need to value decreasing
suspension and expulsion for African
American and African American
students with disabilities.
47
schools and high schools. Bound by the organizational context lies within the administrators’
individual and or collective knowledge and motivation influences depicted by two smaller and
overlapping green circles. Outside of the larger circle at the bottom lies a yellow rectangle
containing the administrators’ goal. The three circles, the larger organizational and the two
smaller knowledge and motivation in the larger circle all interact with each other affecting the
ability for administrators to reach their goal.
Methodological Approach and Rationale
For the purposes of this dissertation, a mixed-methods design was used. The mixed
methods design entails the researcher collecting both quantitative sampling and collecting
qualitative sampling. The results will then be interpreted in a way in which the qualitative results
help to explain the quantitative results and vice versa (Creswell, 2014). In using a mixed method
approach the researcher is hoping to develop a complete understanding of a research problem
(Creswell, 2014).
As the primary researcher for this study, it is pertinent for the researcher to explicitly
state potential biases and to remain reflexive throughout this inquiry (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
The researcher’s philosophical worldview is that of a pragmatist. Pragmatism is a worldview that
stems from actions and consequences in concern with the application of what works in terms of
solutions to problems (Creswell, 2014). Pragmatists believe that research does not happen in a
vacuum but always occurs in a political, social, and historical context (Creswell, 2014).
Pragmatists are not committed to any one system of philosophy and reality (Creswell, 2014).
Pragmatism as a conceptual framework reinforcer the use of the mixed method design in this
inquiry. Pragmatism is a problem-solving approach. Therefore, the researcher is drawn to actions
48
and consequences in concern with the application of what works for solutions to identified
problems (Creswell, 2014).
The mixed method design proposed for this study supports both deductive and inductive
reasoning given the types of data collection methods that were used. Using survey, the researcher
intended to examine the extent to which positive behavior interventions and supports decrease
the ratio of suspensions and expulsions among African American students with disabilities.
Using qualitative case study, the researcher intended to use open-ended interviews, and
document analysis, to unpack and explore the ways in which administrators use positive behavior
interventions and supports at their schools to address the needs of African American students
with disabilities (Creswell, 2014). Both data sets positioned me to further examine the KMO
influences that are supporting or impeding the two schools’ efforts in reducing exclusionary
discipline practices.
Participating Stakeholders
This study explored the implementation of PBIS with respect to culturally responsive
approaches, in middle schools and high schools, as there is a limited research on this topic
(Losen, 2015). The stakeholder group involved in the study consisted of administrators
(educational leaders and vice or assistant educational leaders) in the 183 Southern California
middle schools and high schools recognized by the California PBIS Coalition for implementing
PBIS with at least 40% fidelity or obtaining the Bronze award (California PBIS Coalition, 2016).
These educational leaders were best positioned to discuss the which implantation of CRPBIS
approaches were occurring the schools that were chosen were in counties with populations of
African American students with and without disabilities were at least 5% of the population or
greater. This criteria (5%) was derived from the state’s (California) state-wide demographic
49
percent of African American students (Lucile Packard Foundation for Children's Health, 2019).
The study used a purposeful non-probability census sample and involved as many administrators
in the survey as possible aiming to gather at least 100 surveys, an 55% response rate, to achieve
statistical significance (Johnson & Christensen, 2014; Merriam & Tindell, 2016). However, due
to the Coronavirus pandemic, the racism public health crisis, and the limited time to collect data
only 38 surveys and or 21% response rate was achieved. Surveys were electronically
administered in English. Participants were cold called/ contacted via email to participate in the
survey from a list of schools implementing PBIS. From the larger quantitative sample,
participants elected to participate in a one-to-one, qualitative, semi-structured interview
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Survey Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Criterion 1
Participants must be administrators working in California middle schools or high schools
that are situated in an urban setting with a population of African American and disabled students,
as African American and disabled students are the most affected by disproportionality in
exclusionary discipline practices.
Criterion 2
Schools must have a bronze award for implementing PBIS and have been implementing
positive behavior interventions and supports for at one to three years to ensure that the
participants are knowledgeable (California PBIS Coalition, 2016).
Survey Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
The quantitative survey was conducted first, as the study used a mixed methods
explanatory design. The survey assessed how knowledge, motivation, and organizational (KMO)
50
influences previously discussed in Chapter 2 affect PBIS implementation using questions on a 5-
point Likert scale. Surveys were conducted from May 11
th
, 2020 to June 4
th
, 2020. The purpose
of quantitative sampling is to generalize about the broader population (Johnson & Christensen,
2014). With a list of 183 middle and high schools in Southern California implementing PBIS, the
proposed 100 participant sample would have represented approximately 10% of the larger group
of 1,045 California K-12 schools implementing PBIS. Survey participants were “cold called”
contacted from an established list of school via email and invited to participate. This allowed for
accurate generalization of the findings to California more broadly (Creswell, 2014).
In reality, only 38 participants completed the survey representing a 21% response rate.
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Criterion 1
Schools were California middle schools and or high schools.
Criterion 2
Participants represented schools received at least Bronze-level recognition through the
California PBIS Coalition and were in counties with a population of African American students
with and without disabilities consistent with the respective state statistics for enrollment
(California PBIS Coalition, 2016; Lucile Packard Foundation for Children’s Health, 2019).
Interview Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
The qualitative interviews study used a purposeful sampling strategy. This second study
helped to explain, understand, and synthesize the major themes assessed in the quantitative
surveys (Creswell, 2014). Qualitative interviews helped draw participants’ meaning and create a
more holistic account of the problem of practice (Creswell, 2014). Interviews were held the two
weeks of June 8
th
, 2020 to June 19
th
, 2020.
51
Data Collection and Instrumentation
Table 5
Sampling Strategy and Timeline
Measure
Type
Sampling
Strategy
Number in
Stakeholder
Population
Number of Proposed
Participants from
Stakeholder Population
Start and End
Dates for Data
Collection
Surveys Census 183 100 5/11/20-6/4/20
Interviews Purposeful 13 8 6/08/20-6/19/20
Documents Purposeful
sampling
N/A N/A 7/1/20-7/3/20
Quantitative Data Collection and Instrumentation
In this study, the researcher utilized a quantitative survey (see Table 1). The survey was
be used to address the second and third research question. One goal for the study was to evaluate
whether PBIS is effective in Southern California middle schools and high schools. Surveys are a
valuable method for drawing these types of generalizable conclusions (Creswell, 2014).
Survey Instrument
The survey contained 41 questions addressing the KMO influences. The questions were
answered using a Likert scale that included four options: strongly disagree, somewhat disagree,
somewhat agree, and strongly agree. The survey was adapted from existing research tools,
allowing it to be transferable, valid, and reliable. The survey connected to the Pragmatist
worldview and the Gap analysis framework via evaluating perspectives, knowledge, motivation,
and organizational barriers (Clark & Estes, 2018). Appendix A contains a copy of the survey.
Survey Procedures
The surveys were administered first in the mixed methods research process and were
completed from May 11, 2020 to June 4, 2020. The surveys were administered online using
52
Qualtrics. The surveys were conducted in English. The online format allowed the researcher to
reach a large audience without the need to be physically present to collect data.
Qualitative Data Collection and Instrumentation
The qualitative data collection and instrumentation that were used in this study were
interviews (Creswell, 2008). A purposeful maximum variation sampling method was selected for
this study (Creswell, 2008). Interviews helped assess the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational (KMO) influences discussed in research questions 2 and 3. Interviews were
selected to obtain a holistic, descriptive understanding of the process of implementing PBIS and
any gaps or barriers to that implementation (Creswell, 2008; Weiss, 1994).
Interviews
Interview Protocol
The researchers used semi-structured interviews to collect data for this study. The use of
semi-structured interviews elicits similarities across interviews for comparison and coding but
also allows for some probing and provides a more organic process than a fully structured
interview (Robinson & Firth Leonard, 2019). The interview questions were structured to
examine KMO influences on the implementation of PBIS strategies. Specifically, there were two
questions related to knowledge, three addressing motivation, and two regarding organizational
barriers. Patton (2015) defines six categories of descriptive questions: experience/behavior,
opinion/values, feelings, knowledge, sensory, and demographic/background. Interview questions
in the present study exemplified five of the six categories, excluding demographics questions.
Many of the questions were from the experience/behavioral category. Appendix B contains the
complete list of interview questions.
53
Interview Procedures
The interviews in this study were conducted in June after the surveys were completed.
However, the interviews occurred before the document collection. Eight formal interviews were
conducted on an individual basis. The interviews took place via video conferencing (e.g., Zoom).
Each interview was approximately 30 to 45 minutes long. Thus, the total number of hours
required for interviews across all participants was approximately 5 hours. Interviews were
recorded and transcribed via Zoom. All interviews were conducted in English.
Documents and Artifacts
Due to the Coronavirus pandemic, the researcher was unable to collect documents related
to suspensions and expulsions from administrators, who constitute one stakeholder group. As the
information would have been skewed because students were distance learning from home and
therefore not subjected to exclusionary discipline. Therefore, the researcher analyzed documents
from public databases such as the California Department of Education, provided for the previous
school year. Documents although limited in scope and nature in answering the research question
provided an assessment of whether PBIS is working and the nature of its effects. Specifically,
this study assessed the knowledge, motivation, and organizational barriers to implementing PBIS
that may prevent administrators from achieving their stakeholder goals.
Data Analysis
Quantitative Data
Descriptive statistical analysis was conducted once all survey results were submitted.
Descriptive statistics for all closed ended questions and demographic questions were generated
using SPSS. Descriptive data included frequencies and percentages. It also included measures of
54
central tendency (mean, median, mode) and measures of dispersion (range, min, max, variance,
standard deviation).
Data Cleaning
The raw data was acquired from an Excel spreadsheet that was generated in Qualtrics
from a survey that was taken by high school and middle school educational leaders. The data
were reviewed for inconsistencies and patterns. There were 39 surveys; one timestamp was
deleted because it did not contain any further data, leaving 38 surveys for analysis. The
remaining data were then corrected and cleaned to ensure that quality results would be produced.
Variable names were assigned to each variable. Next, labels and values were created for each
variable based on its characteristics. The cleaned data was imported into SPSS for analysis.
Descriptive statistics, which include frequencies, measures of central tendency, measures of
dispersion, and crosstabs were run.
Qualitative Data
For interviews and surveys, data analysis begun during data collection. Coding is an
iterative, analytical process in which data are organized, sorted, and categorized for analysis.
Codes capture the essential essence of a research story, and when clustered together by a pattern,
actively facilitate the development of categories and their connections (Saldana, 2015). They are
“tags and labels for assigning units of meaning to the descriptive or inferential information
compiled during a study” (Miles & Huberman, 1994, p. 56). The coding process is described
below.
Open Coding
Open coding enables the researcher to look for distinct concepts in the data to develop
first level categories or master headings, as well as second (third, fourth, etc.) level codes that are
55
associated and coded to the primary codes. At this first level of coding, the researcher is looking
for distinct concepts in the data to form the basic categories or units of analysis.
Round One Coding
First, the interview transcripts and Excel spreadsheet containing the open-ended survey
questions were imported into NVivo12 for coding. The first review was a reading through the
entire set of interview responses to develop preliminary coding categories. Open coding was
conducted using line-by-line and sentence analysis. Primary, first level codes were generated
based on the research questions and coding of the transcripts and survey. The names of the codes
were assigned directly from the words that comprised each interview question to ensure
consistency with the coding and to directly align the answers in the transcripts to the appropriate
first level code. For example, one interview question in the interview transcript asked the
participants to describe how they supported and trained teachers on behavior support plans for
tiers two and three. The code for this question was “support train.” Similarly, one open-ended
survey question asked of the participants was to please describe and list what they feel are the
best practices for implementing PBIS with African American students and African American
students with disabilities. The code or label for this question was “PBIS best practices.” Primary,
first level codes were created from each data source. These primary, first level categories were
considered as thematic codes to establish a “framework of thematic ideas” for the subsequent
coding and analysis (Gibbs, 2007).
Round Two Coding
Next, the second round of coding consisted of re-reading each transcript, and open coding
was conducted again. Second, third, fourth and fifth level codes were generated from the answers
provided in the text by each participant that were associated with the first-level, primary codes
56
developed from each data source. The coding labels were assigned using NVivo codes or words
that participants stated in the interviews; codes or labels were developed directly from a word,
words, or phrases from the coded passages of text. The data were coded and grouped according
to similarities. For example, one answer to the question participants gave about how they
supported and trained teachers on behavior support plans for tiers two and three was providing
administrative support to teachers. The in vivo code assigned to these passages of text was
“admin support.”
Round Three Coding
A third review of the coding was carried out to ensure in vivo codes were assigned
properly and to collapse any closely similar codes together. A total of 255 codes emerged from
the interview data, and a total of 207 codes emerged from the open-ended survey questions for a
total of 462 codes.
Theme Development
Once the codes that were similar were collapsed, the data was closely examined to
identify common patterns. This entailed identifying similar codes and passages of text that were
linked by a common idea, which enabled the codes and text to be assessed in an analytical,
systematic fashion rather than with a descriptive focus. The process resulted in the development
of themes or thematic ideas (Gibbs, 2007) into five distinctive areas. The five themes were
described using “thick description” to detail not only human social action but also the context in
which the data were interpreted (Geertz, 1973).
Five emergent themes were developed from the data:
• Working Towards High Implementation Fidelity: Supporting & Training Teachers
• Breaking Down Barriers of PBIS & Fostering Collaboration
57
• Encouraging Culturally Responsive Positive Behavior Interventions & Reinforcing
Cultural Norms
• Changing Policy & Behavior to Reduce Rates
• Best Practices & Recommendations for Implementing PBIS
Validity and Reliability
Salkind (2017) defines reliability as repeatability and validity as whether an instrument
measures what it is intended to measure. Survey instruments and interview questions were
adapted from existing surveys established by the PBIS.org and CRPBIS.org. For the purpose of
this study the researcher has developed a survey instrument of 41 questions with the help and
support of the researcher’s dissertation committee. Regarding content validity, the survey was
designed to measure the decrease in suspension rates for African American students with and
without disabilities (Salkind, 2017). Furthermore, to increase construct validity, or the
operational procedures for the theories to be studied, the researcher used multiple sources of
evidence in the data collection process (Salkind, 2017). This data was cross analyzed with
documents reflecting suspension and expulsions rates. The researcher did not achieve confidence
in the sample size at 100 surveys per group due to the Coronavirus and the email invitation being
blocked because the researcher was an external user. However, the researcher did due diligence
in monitoring response rates and send out reminders to school staff to complete the survey. The
researcher worked to maximize validity within the quantitative data collection process via the
following methods: being aware of potential validity threats, addressing non-response bias,
searching for discrepant evidence, and searching for alternative hypotheses (Maxwell, 2013;
Merriam & Tisdell, 2016)
58
Credibility and Trustworthiness
To maintain the credibility and trustworthiness of the study, the following strategies were
employed: triangulation, clarifying research bias, member checking, using an external auditor,
and using a rich, thick, description to convey the findings (Creswell, 2014; Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). In the qualitative portion of this study, the researcher triangulated the data from multiple
sources (i.e., interviews, surveys, and documents). Throughout the data collection process, the
researcher clarified potential bias through self-reflection, providing an open and honest narrative
for the reader. This included detailed comments about the researcher’s interpretations and how
they are shaped by the researcher’s background (Creswell, 2008; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
During the interview, the research often paraphrased and repeated back the interviewee’s
response as to engage in active listening and for member checking (Maxwell, 2013). An external
auditor was used to objectively evaluate the entire project throughout the data collection,
analysis, and interpretation (Creswell, 2008). Last, the researcher used thick, rich, descriptions so
that readers feel as if they are present in the research setting (Creswell, 2008). Additionally, the
researcher thoroughly checked transcriptions for mistakes, assess for potential drift in the
meaning of the codes, and cross-check codes, ensuring intercoder agreement (Creswell, 2008).
Ethics
A mixed method study involves both quantitative and qualitative ethical issues. Ethical
issues concerned with the informed consent, ensuring voluntary participation, maintaining
confidentiality, permission to record (interview only), and securing data is relative to both
quantitative and qualitative methods. In the quantitative sphere key ethical educational leaders in
survey research, based on the American Association of Public Opinion (AAPOR) code of ethics,
as (a) avoiding harm to participants; (b) information and records must be maintained
59
confidentially by researchers; (c) participation is voluntary; (d) research, activities and finding
must not be misrepresented; and (e) researchers must disclose essential information on the
research being conducted (Rea & Parker, 2014).
In qualitative analysis, the researcher is a guest in private spaces and therefore ethical
considerations must be evaluated with an intent to minimize potential concerns (Merriam
&Tisdell, 2016). Patton’s (2015) Ethical Issues Checklist identify the following 12 items: 1)
Explaining purpose of study; 2) Reciprocity/value to the interviewee; 3) Promises; 4) Risk,;5)
Confidentiality; 6) Informed Consent; 7) Access/ownership; 8) Interviewee’s health; 9) Ethical
advice; 10) Data collection boundaries; 11) Ethical and Methodological choices; and 12) Legal
issues. The purpose of the study will be thoroughly explained. In terms of reciprocity, a very
small $5 Amazon gift card was given to each interviewee upon completion of the interviews as
an incentive. Reciprocity can also be exhibited by communicating the value of the participants
opinions and describing the significance of their contributions (Glense, 2011). The researcher
will not make any promises. As a core ethical tenant to do no harm, the risks have been
minimized because the participants will be educational leaders instead of a vulnerable population
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In order to ensure confidentiality, any medium with any amount of
potentially identifying information will be encrypted, keep in locked storage cabinets, and not
discussed with others.
Participants were given informed consent highlighting that this study is voluntary, they
can withdrawal at any point without penalty, and their identity will be kept confidential.
Permission to audio record the interviews will be signed and obtain prior (Glense, 2011;
Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Patton, 2015). Participants of the study will have access to the results
and complete dissertation upon completion. A $25 Amazon gift card was given to interview
60
participants. Interviewees will more than likely have good mental health as required for them to
sustain the role of principal. Ethical advice was given to the researcher from other members of
the committee and chair. The researcher’s role in the study and boundaries was set prior to the
study and maintained. Ethical and methodological choices were heavily considered. A plan
addressing any potential legal issues was established prior.
In this field study, the research has relationship to an organization nor a prior relationship
to the research participants. Not to say that an external is void of ethical concerns, as an external
researcher power dynamics and perspectives affect the researcher’s role and should be
considered. Questions of identity and access quickly arise as an external researcher (Tatebe,
2015). Therefore, a story/narrative about the researcher’s identity was fleshed out prior to the
data collection phase. The researcher is behavior analyst and works on implementing positive
behavior interventions and supports. The research does not have teaching experience or any
relation to the school. The purpose of the study is for all school staff to implement positive
behavior interventions and supports to reduce disproportionality in school discipline. In addition,
the researcher’s role will be clearly specified in the informed consent to avoid participants
feeling like they have been deceived by participating in the study (Glense, 2011). In order to
increase access, the researcher intends to be as transparent as possible sharing all information
about the study and as before mentioned providing access to the results of the study (Tatebe,
2015). The researcher also engaged in member fact checking to limit personal bias and increase
participants’ validation (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The researcher sought to address issues of
reflexivity in the findings through peer examination (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
61
CHAPTER 4:RESULTS AND FINDINGS
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the degree to which California middle and high
schools achieve their goal of reducing suspension and expulsion rates for African American
students with disabilities. The researcher explored the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences related to achieving this goal, focusing specifically on teachers.
The questions used to guide this study are as follows:
1. By the end of the 2020 academic year, to what extent did California middle and high
schools decrease the rate of exclusionary discipline practices for African American
students with and without disabilities?
2. What are the knowledge and motivations necessary for achieving the stakeholder goal
for administrators to ensure that 100% of teachers implement culturally competent
PBIS?
3. What is the interaction between organizational culture and context and school
administrators’ knowledge and motivation?
Participating Stakeholders
The joint efforts of all stakeholders are necessary to achieve the overall organizational
goal of reducing the disparate use of exclusionary discipline practice on African American
students with disabilities. However, this study will focus specifically on educational leaders and
school administrators. The administrators’ goal is to ensure 100% of teachers implement
culturally competent PBIS procedures (including providing behavior support plans for teaching
children appropriate school conduct) in their daily activities and to encourage teachers’ cultural
responsiveness. Failure to accomplish this goal will lead to continued noncompliance, which in
62
turn may lead to a loss in funding. Funding losses adversely impact the organization’s ability to
provide education, support, and interventions to its students. Noncompliance may also affect the
organization’s overall goal of reducing the rate of suspensions and expulsions among African
American students with disabilities. Thirty-eight educational leaders from California middle
schools and high schools participated in the survey and eight of those educational leaders
participated in the interview. Demographics of the participants are presented in figure 2 (gender),
figure 3 (level of education), figure 4 (race and ethnicity), and figure 5 (experience). Please note
that some participant chose not to answer some or all of the demographic questions.
Figure 2
Gender Demographics
13
19
Male Female
Gender
63
Figure 3
Education Demographics
Figure 4
Race and Ethnicity Demographics
23
11
Master's Degree Doctorate Degree
Education
11 11
5
2
1 1
Hispanic/
Latino
White/
European
American
Black/ African
American
Asian/ Pacific
Islander
Italian
American
Biracial
Race/ Ethnicity
64
Figure 5
Experience Demographics
Results and Findings
This section discusses the results organized by knowledge, motivation, and organization.
Inside of those three sections the results are group by data types organized by quantitative data,
open-ended survey questions, qualitative data and theme. The five themes were created pulling
from all data sources. Tables, graphs, and specific quotes and or thick descriptions are included
in this section. The section also uses the data to specifically address each research question. Last
the data is used to validate each KMO influence labeling it as a need or asset. An asset is
validated when the data shows that 80% or more respondents have shown that they had the
necessary knowledge, motivation, or organizational influence. The interview participants were
all principals and were 50% male and 50% female.
6
18
7
2
1-3 Years 4-6 Years 7-9 Years 10+ Years
Years of PBIS Experience
65
Knowledge Results
Overcoming Barriers to PBIS
The knowledge influence assessed: Identify how to overcome barriers to implementing
PBIS in middle schools and high schools. The researcher asked respondents which barriers were
the most significant in implementing PBIS in their school. Figure 6 shows the frequencies for
barriers they experienced when implementing PBIS. The most significant barrier was the lack of
relationship and rapport building with students (17.90%). Respondents believed they did not
have enough specific procedures to implement PBIS, which was the second largest barrier
(17.90%). The third largest barriers for implementing PBIS, both at 15.40%, were lack of
collaboration and lack of time. Only 10.30% of respondents reported that they lacked the
knowledge to make data-driven decisions. Other barriers (10.30%) respondents noted included
not having enough funds to support incentives, lack of funds for training, and lack of buy-in from
students.
Figure 6
Barriers Implementing PBIS
6 6
4
7
10
4
Lack of
collaboration
Lack of time Lack of
knowledge
Lack of
specificity on
procedures
Lack of
relationships
and rapport
building
Other
Significant Barriers Implementing PBIS
66
Quantitative: Open-Ended Survey Questions
Survey respondents were asked to what extent they were able to mitigate barriers to
implementing PBIS at their school and how did they do it. The lack of teacher and staff buy-in
created barriers for implementing PBIS as reported by 14.71% of respondents. Some respondents
attributed it to the negative perspective and attitude of some teachers, which was often associated
with their tenure. A survey respondent voiced that, “The biggest barrier causing difficulty is the
cluster of negative teachers who continue to complain and sabotage.” Some older teachers
tended to be unwilling to learn the foundational principles, knowledge, and skills needed to
effectively implement PBIS. Another related issue was the lack of relationship building between
certain teachers and students. Some schools use a MTSS teacher or consultants to help teachers
build relationships with students. For example, one survey respondent stated that, “we use this
position very strategically to help these teachers build relationships with our students. This
includes classroom management coaching, restorative circles, classroom support, and one-on-one
support. It is important to have staff buy-in and commitment for successful implementation of
PBIS.
Qualitative
The knowledge influence assessed in the following question addressed; identify how to
overcome barriers to implementing PBIS in middle schools and high schools. The literature has
identified some of the barriers as lack of knowledge and or training (Chitiyo & Wheeler, 2009).
Interview respondents were asked to describe how they support and train teachers on how to gain
knowledge of tier two and tier three behavior support plans. Most interview respondents (7 out of
8) responded utilizing the PBIS team and sending those members of the team to training. One out
of the seven respondents mentioned that all teachers were now in the process of being trained
67
and not just a small committee and or team. The one of the eight interview respondents simply
did not provide any information regarding a team or training and responded “we are not there
yet” to implementing tier two and tier three. Furthermore, most of the interview respondents
62.5% (5 out 8) responded that this is an area of need. Jo stated “I mean, I have a long way to
go. I have a long way to go, but we’re trying, we’re on your way through it”. Jordan stated “tier
three was in the process of being implemented halfway through last year”. Jamie stated “oh, so,
tier three was a new implementation that we just started this past school year”. Gabe stated “in
tier two and tier three, I would say we’re still further developing that”. Most interview
respondents were not far enough along in the process to articulate what in specific was creating a
barrier to their progress in implementing tier two and tier three behavior support plans however,
the majority (62.5%) were able to access that this was an area of need and or a gap in knowledge.
To also assess this knowledge influence respondents were asked to describe how you
foster metacognition surrounding time-management in your teachers and do teachers have time
set aside in their schedule to work on PBIS. All, 100% of interview respondents spoke of a
schedule consisting of staff meeting, professional development, learning communities,
mentorship programs and or district support embedded into the teacher’s schedule, weekly,
monthly, and annually. However, two respondents referenced the Coronavirus making it
challenging to address issues of time management with their teachers. One principal spoke of
hiring substitute teachers to assist teachers in need, allowing them more time for PBIS, and
professional development. Two respondents came out and stated that there is just never enough
time, we need more time, and or this is challenging. Most respondents were able to able describe
how they foster metacognition surrounding time-management in teachers and they had enough
68
time. The qualitative data is consistent with the quantitative data in that the quantitative data
listed time-management was only tied for the third largest barrier out of six identified barriers.
Issues of lack of collaboration and buy-in were also assessed in this knowledge influence.
Respondents were asked to describe what steps you take to foster collaboration and buy-in for
positive behavior interventions and supports among other multilevel school staff at the middle
school or high school level. Most interview respondents responded they fostered collaboration
and buy-in by having professional development, webinars and workshops, department
discussions, a lounge, PBIS monthly meetings, PBIS teams, PBIS teacher direct days, and
building framework. A few (3 out of 8) interview respondents mentioned modeling behavior and
providing teacher incentives. For example, Toni stated “So, we give incentives to teachers that
are making progress in those areas”. Jo stated
“so food goes a long way…I cook for them…we bring in people to get them involved, we
model the same behavior for the kids and the adults, teacher dollars type things as well as for
raffles, you know, a duty free period, or you know something like that.”
PBIS is rooted in Applied Behavior Analysis and it is a common practice in the field to
offer rewards and incentive, based on the theoretical framework that all behavior has a pay-off
(Cooper, Heron & Heward, 2007). A couple of interview respondents 25% (2 out of 8)
expressed difficulties with gaining collaboration and support. For example, Jordan noted
“Teachers were fraught with anxiety, with tension and in some cases just downright
refusal to engage…it was that 20-25% of my 72 member staff, who just were having none of it.
So, what I decided to do was have one to one conversations and discussions about some of the
hurdles and here is what I heard, PBIS just about lets the kids get away with murder. They need
to be suspended, they need to, you know, they basically wanted heads on spikes around the
69
perimeter of the school. And so engaging people and having conversations around biases that
they bring to the classroom, asking them to think about a different approach and build
relationships, showing empathy and understanding of what children bring to school every day.
We had some breakthroughs…I did my best leading by example, being a role model.”
Gabe stated the following:
“This is confidential right, if you have a union something teacher who thinks it’s the dumbest
stuff they’ve ever heard there’s nothing we can do to hold the teacher accountable…I have to
figure out why they don’t think this good for kids and I’m kind of a used car salesman. At this
point, like selling it to them, right, I must figure out why that doesn’t resonate with them and
typically it’s a control issue, somebody who is fearful of losing control.”
However, interview respondent cited the teacher’s union contributed positively to
fostering collaboration and buy-in in that teacher’s set aside a PBIS collaboration teacher’s
directed day. Most of the respondents acknowledged that collaboration and buy-in is something
that they have been working on for years, year after year and that district support is helpful.
Themes
Breaking Down Barriers of PBIS & Fostering Collaboration
This theme focused on the ways in which schools broke down barriers and the types of
negative impacts they experienced implementing PBIS. The influence assessed: Identify how to
overcome barriers to implementing PBIS in middle schools and high schools. Some schools
reported that they received negative attention and pushback about their culture being lax and
allowing students to do whatever they wanted, so a change in culture was important, and once
implemented, it was easier to control student behavior. Some believed that PBIS did not tackle
the issue of diversity well, especially concerning the problem with disparities among ethnic and
70
racial groups as shown by data. There was a lack of equity in participation. Another issues some
schools experienced was the difficulty working with stakeholders who did not buy-in to PBIS.
Similarly, some teachers struggled with the idea of “less” discipline and the lack of
consequences for poor behavior and did not buy into PBIS. Other schools did not have enough
funding or time to implement PBIS.
Fostering collaboration and buy-in is a major challenge in implementing PBIS. This
paragraph focuses on the steps that schools took to foster collaboration and create buy-in among
teachers and staff to successfully implement PBIS. Some schools had time set aside specifically
for collaboration. For example, one school emphasized that collaboration was embedded in their
professional development training for teachers. Other schools provided incentives to create
collaboration and buy-in for PBIS. Some schools used an action plan, which required consensus
from their entire team, thereby fostering collaboration and buy-in for PBIS. Some school
focused on group and one-on-one discussions to find solutions to barriers on implementing PBIS.
These focused dialogues helped to eliminate or reduce the negative mindsets and biases of
teachers and staff towards implementing PBIS and create unification, expectations, and buy-in.
However, some teachers had high anxiety and refused to engage united on the same page.
Several schools discussed how teacher contracts and the collective bargaining agreement
outlined the use of collaboration time.
The knowledge influence assessed: Identify best practices for implementing PBIS for
African American students and African American students with disabilities. Survey respondents
were asked to describe and list what they felt are the best practices for implementing PBIS with
African American students and African American students with disabilities. Out of 29 survey
respondents, 24.13% indicated that implementing inclusionary practices was a best practice for
71
implementing PBIS with African American students, including those with disabilities. Schools
benefited from considering the unique perspectives, values, preferences, and needs to develop
culturally responsive approaches. Some schools used focus groups to regularly meet with
African American students to monitor progress while others used humanizing strategies to make
students feel validated. For example, one respondent stated, “We define a mutual understanding
of respect that aligns with their culture and honor that definition.” Another respondent affirmed
that the school “recognizes their identities, approaching students as a warm-demander.”
Other survey respondents, approximately 27.58% discussed the importance of
professional development and training for teachers and staff as a best practice for implementing
PBIS with African American students and African American students with disabilities.
Professional development and trainings focused on equity, diversity, and educating teachers and
staff on how to acknowledge positive behavior. A survey respondent stated, “ Also providing
staff with PD and steps they need to implement in the classroom before referring to office, such
as contacting parents, having a conversation with student, explaining what he expectation in the
class are and providing PBIS incentives in the classroom and acknowledging.” Promoting
African American staff was also a plan of action for schools.
Best Practices & Recommendations for Implementing PBIS
This theme focused on best practices used by schools to successfully implement PBIS.
The influence assessed: Identify best practices for implementing PBIS for African American
students and African American students with disabilities. Many schools used communication
strategies with staff and parents. Some of these strategies focused on developing a common
language, as well as using clear and concise communication and open discussion. Another best
practice used by schools was establishing clear expectations school-wide for behavior. Some
72
schools provide professional development for staff so they would be equipped to implement
interventions before referring students to the office, including contacting parents, having a
conversation with students about behavior expectations. Teachers also provided incentives in the
classroom and acknowledged positive behavior daily. Other schools used inclusionary practices
such as using focus groups to get feedback and from African American students, as well as
humanizing strategies. Some schools used positive reinforcement by creating plans to encourage
students to make good choices, while others used restorative practices. One best practice used
was the hiring of African American administrators, teachers, and counselors. A number of
schools reviewed and analyzed data, such as the number of weekly referrals.
Motivation Results
Quantitative
The motivation influence assessed: Administrators need to feel efficacious in their ability
to implement all three tiers of positive behavior interventions and supports strategies at the
middle and high school level. The researcher computed measures of central tendency to
summarize the data for the motivation self-efficacy (SE) variables. The researcher also computed
measures of dispersion to understand the variability of scores for the variables. The results are
listed in Table 6. These questions consisted of five items related to the respondents’ confidence
in implementing PBIS at their school, including systems for behavioral expectations, supporting
teachers, and steps to reduce suspension and expulsion rates. Respondents responded to
questions about their confidence level in these areas using a 5-point Likert scale with 1 being not
at all confident and 5 being very confident. Because the data is ordinal, it is appropriate to
provide the mode, rather than the mean or median.
73
Respondents also responded to questions about whether they felt confident in their ability
to create a specific acknowledgement system for students who meet behavioral expectations.
According to the respondents, the most common Likert-scale value chosen for this question was
5, or very confident. As shown in Table 7, 71.8% of respondents were very confident in their
ability to create a specific acknowledgement system to recognize students with good behavior.
Next, respondents responded to questions about their ability to ensure that behavioral
expectations are visible around the school and in every classroom. The mode for responses to
this question is 5, indicating that 66.7% of respondents were very confident. Respondents also
assessed their confidence supporting teachers who are struggling with the implementation of
PBIS. The mode for responses to this question is 4; most respondents (53.8%) indicated that they
were fairly confident in their ability to support teachers. The researcher also asked respondents
about their confidence to ensure that all three tiers of PBIS are being implemented with high
degrees of fidelity. The most common Likert-scale value or answer chosen to this question was
4, or fairly confident. Approximately 46.20% of respondents were fairly confident in their ability
to implement the three tiers of PBIS with a high degree of fidelity. Lastly, respondents responded
to a question about whether they were confident in assisting in the management of problem
behaviors in the classroom. The mode is both 4 and 5, indicating that half of the respondents
(46.20%) were fairly confident and the other half (46.20%) were very confident in assisting with
managing problem behaviors in the classroom.
74
Table 6
Measures of Dispersion and Central Tendency for Motivation-SE Influencers
Item Variance SD Min Max Range M Mdn Mode
Acknowledgement System 0.44 0.69 2 5 3 5 5 5
Behavioral Expectations 0.20 0.45 4 5 1 5 5 5
Support Teachers 0.37 0.61 3 5 2 4 4 4
PBIS Tiers 0.60 0.77 2 5 3 4 4 4
Problem Behaviors 0.25 0.50 4 5 1 5 5 4
Table 7
Frequencies for Motivation-SE Influencers
Item Not at all
confident
Slightly
confident
Somewhat
confident
Fairly
confident
Very
confident
Acknowledgement
System
0.00% 2.60% 2.60% 20.50% 71.80%
Behavioral
Expectations
0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 25.60% 66.70%
Support Teachers 0.00% 0.00% 7.70% 53.80% 35.90%
PBIS Tiers 0.00% 5.10% 2.60% 46.20% 23.10%
Qualitative
The motivation influence assessed in the following question addressed; Administrators
need to feel efficacious in their ability to implement all three tiers of positive behavior
interventions and supports strategies at the middle and high school level. Interview respondents
were asked to describe the strategies you use to communicate the value of collaboration among
school staff. Communicating value to teachers to increase collaboration all school staff could
increase the principal’s self-efficacy. Sixty-two-point-five-percent of interview respondents
75
seemed to feel very good about their ability to promote the value of collaboration and they spoke
very positively about it. However only 37.5 % were actually implementing all three tiers of
PBIS. Many referenced the following: building a community and a family mantra, constant
communication, district mission, learning community, reward systems, training, team building,
the use Kagan strategy, and the use of data. Sam stated “
I make a big speech about them and how we have each other’s back and how we will call
out some of the challenges, we have a mantra, …I push constantly that sense of community”.
Sam was very confident and felt strongly that his staff valued collaboration and they was
a sense of family and community. Toni stated “
I want to start off with first saying that it’s an investment…as we talk about
collaboration as a district-wide initiative…and the mission of the school site and passing it along
to different departments and leaders so everyone is accountable.
Toni extended this collaboration to the district and reinforced this with the school’s mission.
Although the respondents did not deny the challenges in fostering collaboration, they seemed to
feel efficacious in their ability to instill collaboration as a value in their staff. To triangulate the
data analysis, the qualitative data coincides with the quantitative data in the administrators felt
fairly confident that they could to ensure that all three tiers of PBIS are being implemented with
high degrees of fidelity. Collaboration is a key component to implementing all three tiers of
PBIS and it increased the fidelity.
Value Diversity Equity and Inclusion
Quantitative
The motivation influence assessed: Administrators need to value diversity, inclusion, and
equity. The researcher computed measures of central tendency to summarize the data for the
76
motivation value (V) variables, and computed measures of dispersion to understand the
variability of scores for the variables. The results are listed in Table 8 and Table 9. These
questions consisted of six items about respondents’ commitment to diversity, inclusion, and
equity; curriculum challenges; reducing suspension rates; and the extent to which they value
cognitive / neurodiversity. The researcher asked respondents a series of questions in these areas
using a 7-point Likert scale with 1 being strongly disagree and 7 being strongly agree. Because
the data are ordinal, the mode is a more appropriate measure of central tendency than the mean
or median.
Respondents responded to questions about whether they promote a strong commitment to
diversity, inclusion, and equity at their school. The mode, or most common choice, was strongly
agree. Approximately 61.50% of all respondents strongly agreed that they can promote a strong
commitment to diversity, inclusion, and equity among students at their school, as shown in Table
9. Respondents also assessed themselves on whether they value a curriculum that challenges
stereotypes. The mode was 7; about 36.4% strongly agreed that they believed a curriculum
focused on breaking down stereotypes to be important. Almost half of the respondents (46.20%)
strongly agreed that they value diverse mental processes of acquiring knowledge and differences
in how different individuals interpret and respond to social cues. Lastly, respondents were asked
whether they value cognitive / neurodiversity. The mode of responses to this question was 7.
Overall, the mode for each of the five questions was 7, or strongly agree, indicating the
respondents’ strong ideals and commitment to implementing PBIS in their schools.
Respondents were asked to rate their direct experiences at their schools related to
diversity, equity and inclusion. Only of respondents 69.20% considered their school to be non-
77
racist. Respondents were asked if their school was diverse and only 71.80% considered their
school instead of homogenous. The results are listed in Table 9 and Table 10.
Qualitative
The motivation influence assessed in the following question addressed; Administrators
need to value diversity, inclusion, and equity. Interview respondents were asked, how do you
communicate the value of diversity, equity and inclusion to all your stakeholders at your school?
50% (4out 8) respondents identified this as an area of need and or stated progress on this issue is
new and does not yet reflect in the data for reducing suspensions for this population. Jordan
stated “so you know what I am going to be honest, I don’t think we really did a good job of
that…that’s an area we need improvement. Toni stated “there is definitely room for
improvement”. For example, Gabe stated the following:
“What we are seeing right now with the Black Lives Matter movement is that even people, even
if you’re not black. Yeah. And we were being welcomed and invited to say we’re passionate
about this and I want something done…I am getting emotional but it’s being recognized as
important and vital part of making this change. Finally, you know, I have been working with
these kids for years and nothing changes. And people are afraid to have the
conversation…community circles are where it happens, you know, we have three rooms
dedicated on our campus with student murals and artwork and chairs and beautiful rugs so if a
teacher wants to have a conversation that shouldn’t happen in their classroom space like they
recognize it says fit, where kids need to feel welcomed there are three dedicated spaces for that.
Also, Google Classroom is a really awesome resource that has come up through remote
learning.”
78
As recognized by Gabe, many teachers were afraid to have that conversation and little to no
progress was being made on diversity, equity, and inclusion. In fact, all of the respondents
acknowledged that this is an area that needs improvement. Some progress is being made with
culturally responsive lesson plans and community circles however both are very new, and
administrators feel they have a long way to go.
Working Towards High Fidelity Implementation (Supporting & Training Teachers)
The influence assessed: Administrators need to feel efficacious in their ability to
implement all three tiers of positive behavior interventions and supports strategies at the middle
and high school level. This theme focused on how teachers were supported and trained on
behavior support plans at tiers two and three to reach high fidelity implementation of PBIS.
Some schools had a dedicated PBIS team that was charged with training teachers throughout the
year. For example, several schools had a PBIS tier one committee to train and support staff.
Other schools the administrative team proved support for teachers. For example, a coordinator
ensured that services were organized, and teachers were on the same page in regard to building
behavior support plans. Most schools had devoted time towards implementing PBIS to ensure
that administrators, teachers, and staff participated in professional development, self-reflection,
behavior modification, open dialogue, reviewed data, as well as time to work on challenging
issues. These efforts helped to promote student engagement, improved decision-making, and
buy-in among teachers for implementing PBIS. However, at some schools’ teachers did not have
enough time to work on PBIS, which prohibited them from taking a deeper dive into program
initiatives.
This paragraph relays on how schools implemented PBIS and the positive impacts that
resulted. Positive impacts included behavioral changes among students and a decrease in
79
egregious actions, which also contributed to the decline in discipline. Some schools found that
there was greater respect and trust among teachers and students, greater parent involvement, and
greater collaboration, creating a stronger sense of community. There was higher attendance,
increased class time, as well as increased student learning, which led to higher academic success.
Schools reported there was an increase in a positive climate and equal treatment.
Value Decreasing Suspensions
Quantitative
The motivation influence assessed: Administrators need to value decreasing suspension
and expulsion for African American and African American students with disabilities. Next, the
researcher asked respondents whether they believed that the disproportionality in suspension
rates for African American students with disabilities is a pressing issue that needs attention. The
mode was 7, and 74.40% of respondents strongly agreed that the suspension rates for African
American students with disabilities should be addressed. Respondents also responded to
questions about whether they value policies that reduce suspension rates for African American
students, including those with disabilities. Approximately 66.70% of respondents strongly agreed
that these policies must be revisited; the mode was 7.
80
Table 8
Measures of Dispersion and Central Tendency for Motivation-V Influencers
Item Variance SD Min Max Range M Mdn Mode
Strong
Commitment 0.23 0.48
6
7
1 7 7
7
Value Curriculum 0.52 0.72 4 7 3 6 7 7
Suspension Rates 0.90 0.95 3 7 4 7 7 7
Value Policies 0.63 0.79 4 7 3 7 7 7
Value Cognitive 0.65 0.80 4 7 3 6 6 7
Reduce
Suspensions 0.53 0.22
0 1 1 1 1 1
Table 9
Frequencies for Motivation-V Influencers
Item Strongly
disagree
Disagree Somewhat
disagree
Neither
agree
nor
disagree
Somewhat
agree
Agree Strongly
agree
Strong
Commitment 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 35.90% 61.50%
Value
Curriculum 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.60% 5.10% 33.30% 36.40%
Suspension
Rates 0.00% 0.00% 2.60% 2.60% 7.70% 10.30% 74.40%
Value Policies 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 5.10% 2.60% 23.10% 66.70%
Value
Cognitive 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 5.10% 5.10% 41.00% 46.20%
81
Table 10
Frequency of Whether Racist or Non-Racist Represents Experiences at School
N (%)
Racist 5 12.80%
Neutral 1 2.60%
Non-racist 27 69.20%
Table 11
Frequency of Whether Homogenous or Diverse Represents Experiences at School
N (%)
Homogenous 2 5.10%
Neutral 4 10.30%
Diverse 28 71.80%
Open-Ended Survey Questions
The motivation influence assessed: Administrators need to value decreasing suspension
and expulsion for African American and African American students with disabilities.
Respondents were asked to describe the steps they have taken to decrease the rate of suspensions
and expulsions for African American students with disabilities. Respondents were motivated
enough to take action. Out of 34 survey respondents, 35.30% stated that they implemented
alternative initiatives to reduce the suspension and expulsion rates. For example, one survey
respondent stated, “We created an Alternative to Suspension program for all students which
connects students to the counseling, program, mentoring and academic support that they
specifically need to decrease negative behavior.” Other survey respondents discussed initiatives
such as establishing focused programs to assist and support students. One survey respondent
stated, “We have opened up a Student Success Center, a room dedicated and staffed with
82
mentors for the entire day which enabled us to meet the needs of students at the time of the
need.”
The implementation of interventions and supports was also used to decrease the rate of
suspensions and expulsions for students with disabilities as reported by 41.18% of survey
respondents. One support used by schools was fostering relationships with students and parents,
as well as encouraging caring relationships between students and teachers, such as mentoring. A
survey respondent stated, “There are two mentoring programs that we use specifically for
African American students. In addition, we have implemented more restorative practices so that
not all interventions are punitive.” Interventions also included classroom strategies for reducing
disparities in the use of suspension, such as using lessons that meet socio-emotional needs,
promoting culture, and classroom visits by administrators to observe and support teachers to
provide them with feedback on their teaching and behavior and interactions with students. For
example, one respondent expressed the need for promoting culture in the classroom. He stated,
“In the classroom we have units to promote cultural pride and opportunities for students to
engage in PBLs around sensitive subject areas.”
Qualitative
The motivation influence assessed in the following question addressed; Administrators
need to value decreasing suspension and expulsion for African American and African American
students with disabilities. Interview respondents were asked to 1) Describe the process of
deciding to suspend or expel a student based on a teacher referral? 2) How has the process to
suspend or expel a student changed since you implemented PBIS? 3) Describe the importance of
decreasing suspension for African American children with and without disabilities. The research
indicates that many teachers do not even believe that overrepresentation for African American
83
students is even a problem so can assume that it in this case there would be a lack of value (Gage
et.al, 2011). In terms of the first questions most interview respondents 62.5% (5 out of 8)
referred to four ed code violations that would deem it necessary to suspend or expel students. For
example, one respondent to referred to his ed code as the “bible”. They also stated that teachers
do not make decisions to suspend students but rather the decision goes to the dean of students
and or it is the principal’s discretion.
In terms of the second question, the majority of interview respondents, 75% (6 out of 8)
stated that suspensions have decreased after the implementation of PBIS. In terms of the last
question, question three, 85% (six out of seven, one not asked) described the importance of
decreasing suspension for African American children with and without disabilities-respondents
as the following: to address needs, background training, family engagement, liaisons, IEP team,
kids included in behavior plans, and more support is needed. Jamie “we need to make sure we’re
addressing their needs…and we always try, especially our students with disabilities”. Alex stated
the following about the importance of decreasing suspensions for African American students
with and without disabilities:
“I think it’s extremely important that we keep track of the data. Due to the fact you know it
shouldn’t be where we have you know predominantly Hispanic in the average is you know
maybe a couple and then we have a spike in the African American, then we really have to kind of
look at what’s going on, you know, special ed…we have to look at why are they in special ed,
they may not belong…spiking because that’s an internal problem, then if that seems to continue
to increase…we have to look at ourselves and ask why.”
84
Toni simply stated “I value that, I put a high priority on that!”. Again, many respondents felt it
was important to decrease disparate rate of exclusionary discipline practices among African
American students with and without disabilities.
Changing Policy & Behavior to Reduce Rates
The influence assessed: Administrators need to value decreasing suspension and
expulsion for African American and African American students with disabilities. This theme
focused on processes schools used when making decisions to suspend or expel students, whether
the process changed, and steps taken to decrease the suspension and expulsion rate among
African American students, including those with disabilities. A number of schools stated they
followed the Ed code for warranting a suspension or expulsion, which in some cases are
mandatory. Many schools looked at suspending or expelling students as a last resort. As such,
they implemented restorative justice intervention programs, focusing on using community
circles. Similarly, some schools used a system of progressive discipline depending on the type
and severity of the behavioral problem, which determined the course of action used. Most
schools kept teacher referrals to a minimum.
For some schools, it was a priority to decrease suspensions and expulsions for African
American students, including those with disabilities. A strategy used by one school included
using a family engagement liaison to work with parents and students to address discipline issues.
Other schools felt it was important to ensure that students attend school daily and take steps to
make sure they do not feel excluded because of their race or a disability.
85
Organizational Results
Cultural Responsiveness
The organizational influence assessed: All stakeholders need to promote a sense of value
in creating multicultural school norms. The researcher computed measures of central tendency to
summarize the data for the organization cultural setting (CS) variables, and measures of
dispersion to understand the variability of scores for the variables. The results are listed in Table
10. These questions consisted of three items regarding how respondents view the student and
parent engagement in creating school norms; whether teacher, staff, and administrators value
culturally responsive norms; and teaching incentives. Survey respondents responded to a series
of questions in these areas using a 7-point Likert scale with 1 being strongly disagree and 7 being
strongly agree. The mode is reported rather than the mean or median because the data is ordinal.
Survey respondents also responded to questions about the importance of norms in their school.
Specifically, they were asked whether students and parents were actively engaged in creating
school norms. The mode of responses to this question was 6; 35.90% of respondents agreed that
students and parents were involved, demonstrating the importance of building positive
relationships for more effective PBIS outcomes. The researcher also asked respondents about
whether school staff, teachers, and administrators valued creating culturally responsive school
norms. The mode of responses to this question was 6, indicating that 41% of respondents agreed
that educators and staff found utility in developing culturally responsive school norms. Lastly,
respondents were asked about whether teachers were rewarded for teaching culturally relevant
curriculum. The mode of responses to this question was 4. Unlike prior answers, where most
respondents either strongly agreed or agreed, they neither agreed nor disagreed. About one fourth
86
or 25.60% of survey respondents were neutral concerning rewards given to teachers if they used
a culturally relevant curriculum.
Table 12
Measures of Dispersion and Central Tendency for Organization-CS Influencers
Item Variance SD Min Max Range M Mdn Mode
Student and Parent
Engagement
1.46 1.21 2 7 5 5 5 6
Value Cultural Norms 0.78 0.88 3 7 4 6 6 6
Teachers Rewarded 2.63 1.62
7 6 5 5 4
Table 13
Frequencies for Organization-CS Influencers
Item Strongly
disagree
Disagree Somewhat
disagree
Neither
agree
nor
disagree
Somewhat
agree
Agree Strongly agree
Student &
Parent
Engagement
0.00% 2.60% 10.30% 10.30% 30.80% 35.90% 7.70%
Value
Cultural
Norms
0.00% 0.00% 2.60% 0.00% 30.80% 41.00% 23.10%
Teachers
Rewarded
2.60% 12.80% 5.10% 25.60% 23.10% 15.40% 12.80%
Open-Ended Survey Questions
The organizational influence assessed: All stakeholders need to promote a sense of value
in creating multicultural school norms. Survey respondents were asked to provide a rationale for
all the multicultural and/ or culturally responsive norms at their school. Out of 27 survey
respondents, 51.85% expressed that multicultural and/or culturally responsive norms are
87
behavioral expectations and standards expected by all students to encourage positive behaviors.
Behavioral norms were incorporated into student expectations to promote good choices, build
character, and develop leadership. Behavioral norms discussed by the respondents included
integrity, courtesy, diversity, compassion, respect, responsibility, equity, inclusion and others.
One survey respondent stated,
“We believe in inclusion. All students and staff are valued. We started a Gay Straight Alliance
this year because a student felt it was a need at our school. Student, staff, and parent suggestions
are welcomed.”
Another survey respondent stated, “We establish high expectations for all students, including
consistency in implementation and consequences. Cultural norms are part a framework that
identifies respect or disrespect”.
Processes and practices were another means by which multicultural and/or culturally
responsive norms were used to encourage positive behaviors in schools expressed by 29.63% of
respondents. Processes and practices build an atmosphere and culture of valuing diversity and
inclusion. One survey respondent stated, “We encourage students to have a voice and be
involved in school decisions and community decisions.” Another survey respondent expressed
that, “At our school site, we have signage around the school and in classrooms that reinforce the
positive behaviors that we want students to implement. “
Teacher and staff professional development and training was another way to establish
multicultural and cultural norms in schools and classrooms conveyed by 18.52% of respondents.
The development of multicultural curriculums and the use of PBIS matrix to promote cultural
awareness and reinforce positive behaviors. One survey respondent stated the following:
88
“Culturally relevant and diverse curriculum--we want students to see themselves in what
they are studying so they buy-in and see the relevance. Clear expectations as to what is
acceptable behavior for an academic setting with an understanding by staff that there will be
variance according to a student's culture. Cultural awareness professional development is done
with staff.”
Qualitative
Interview respondents were asked to describe how they encourage culturally competent
and or responsive positive behavior. Research indicates that culturally competent school norms
are essential to reducing suspensions and increasing academic engagement (Bal, et.al, 2018; Fine
et.al, 1997).The organization influence assessed in the following question addressed; 62.5% of
stakeholders stated they needed to improve in promoting a sense of value in creating
multicultural school norms. Responses included the following codes: CCJ, community circle
training, consultants, district consultant, external company, culturally responsive teaching
professional development, Tier 2 and 3 interventions, faculty hangouts, individual conversations,
kindness campaign, knowledge gap, model behavior, move teachers out, pedagogy development,
school action plan, create space, created academy, hired diverse staff, positive culture change,
teacher awareness, teacher benefits, training, growth mindset, and staff resistance. Most
respondents (3 out 8) identified how they were working on this issue currently. Jamie stated “we
see that as a gap in our district”. Gabe stated “that work, we just started doing that work”. “Erin
stated “we have not gotten far enough”.
To share some positive examples of how it was being worked on currently, two
respondents mentioned that their districts had just implemented a culturally responsive history
89
curriculum and dedicated a teacher to work on that specifically. One principal Jordan shared a
success story he had at his previous school, and he stated the following:
“So here a success story, which I’ll share with you, out of this the Wakanda Academy was
born…given the significant achievement gap in California schools are facing around African
American student achievement. Teachers of color came together and said we have to do
something about this and out of that a culturally sensitivity, culturally responsive pedagogy piece
was added on to our PBIS…so as the principal I used to make these wonderful meals and they
would all come…we routinely had 50 to 60 families that showed up. Out of that Wakanda
Academy was born and I think it was a success in so many ways because it was led by black
powerful strong educators who connected directly with the students and families”.
If there were more respondents and schools creating culturally responsive school norms, we may
be able to make great strides in not only closing the discipline gap, but the achievement gap as
well.
Encouraging Culturally Responsive Positive Behavior Interventions & Reinforcing
Cultural Norms
The influence assessed: All stakeholders need to promote a sense of value in creating
multicultural school norms. This theme focused on how schools encouraged culturally competent
and responsible behavior, and reinforced cultural norms. There were diverse courses of action
taken by schools, such as identifying knowledge gaps in culturally responsiveness and cultural
competence and filling them. Another school developed culturally relevant and sensitive
pedagogy to consider the diversity of the school population. The school hired a district
consultant worked with staff on developing the pedagogy. Another school implemented kindness
campaign to promote school norms across cultures while others used school leaders to model
behavior. Several schools used professional development to train teachers and help them grow
90
their mindset, in terms of staying positive and adaptable to higher expectations, in their
interactions with students. Some school plans also established expectations for teachers to have
positive interactions with students, setting a baseline for measurement. At one school, teachers
who continually resist and do not get on board with PBIS and other strategies to reduce
suspensions are not kept on staff. Most schools reinforced culturally responsive norms for
behavior such as demonstrating courtesy, having compassion, integrity, and acceptance, helping
others, and making connections.
Resources
Qualitative
The organization influence assessed in the following question addressed; Schools need
the resources necessary to ensure all staff and teachers have the training and tools required to
implement PBIS with fidelity. Interview respondents were asked to describe how you allocate
resources to PBIS. Research indicates that adequate resources are essential in reaching
stakeholder goals (Clark & Estes, 2008). All 100% respondents (6 out of 8; 2 were not asked)
stated they are a title one schools and described having a very large or unlimited budget. Jo
stated “I don’t want to say it’s an unlimited budget, but I think it’s a budget that I don’t put a
limit on”. Erin stated “We get about $1.2 million federally”. All of the respondents asked stated
that PBIS is a priority and they allocate adequate funding to PBIS.
Answering Research Questions
Research Question One
Research question one was the following: by the end of the 2020 academic year, to what
extent did California middle schools and high schools decrease the rate of exclusionary
discipline practices for African American students with and without disabilities? Due to the
91
Coronavirus pandemic, research was compromised, a thorough document analysis could not be
done and therefore answering this question is limited. Data was inaccurate due to remote
learning because of the Coronavirus Pandemic stay-at-home orders. According to two sources
(an article in Ed Source and California Department of Education website) the suspension rate for
African American students for the 2019-2020 school year is at 9.1%. This means that California
middle and high schools fall short of the goal. Although, suspensions have decreased for this
population they have not decreased substantially or declined far enough. Suspensions and
expulsions have decline one percent among African American students in the last five years.
Suspensions were at 10.1% in 2015. Suspensions for white students were 3% for the 2019-2020
means that African American student were still disproportionality higher, 3 times more likely to
get suspended than their white counterparts (www.cde.ca.gov). The global goal for California
middle and high schools was the following: by the end of the school year 2020, reduce the rate of
suspensions and expulsions for African American students without disabilities by 5% (i.e., from
the current rate of 9.1% to 4% or less) and for African American students with disabilities by 13
% (i.e., from 30% in 2012 to 17% or less). No information was found specifically related to
African American students with disabilities. To answer the research question, suspensions have
decreased by a percent from 2015 however the rate remains the same for the 2019-2020 school
year and it needs to still drop by 5%.
Research Question Two
Each influence is considered an asset meeting the criteria of 80% of the participants, as
reflected in the data, have stated they have a particular type of knowledge, motivation, or
organizational influence. If the data reflects that the threshold is below 80% then the influence is
determined a need.
92
Research question two was the following: what are the knowledge and motivations
necessary for achieving the stakeholder goal for administrators to ensure 100% of teachers
implement culturally competent PBIS? The results are shown in Table 14.
The influence and the determination as followed:
93
Table 14
Table Title
K and M influence Data Need or Asset
1. Identify best practices
for implementing PBIS
for African American
students with and
disabilities.
Open-ended Questions only
19 of 38 identified best
practices
50%:
NEED
2. Identify how to
overcome barriers to
implementing PBIS in
middle schools and high
schools.
Quant data 86%
commented on how they
mitigated barriers, only
37.5 % did not identify it as
a need. The two data points
averaged together is 62%.
62%:
NEED
3. Administrators need to
feel efficacious in their
ability to implement all
three tiers of positive
behavior interventions
and supports strategies
at the middle and high
school level.
Quant data: very confident
was the most selected.
71%. Qualitative 37.5%
were implementing all three
tiers.
54 %
NEED
94
4. Administrators need to
value diversity,
inclusion, and equity.
Quant data, averaged :79 %
(97.4, 69. 7, 87.2, 69.20,
71.80)
Qual data: only 50% stated
this needs improvement.
79% and 50% averaged is
64.5%
64.5%
NEED
5. Administrators need to
value decreasing
suspension and
expulsion for African
American and African
American students with
disabilities.
Quant data 89.8 % valued
policies to reduce
suspensions for this
population. Qual data 74%
(62.5%, 75%, 85%) stated
they value decreasing
suspensions and expulsions
for African American
students with and without
disabilities is important:
88% averaged
82%
ASSET
95
Research Question Three
Research question three was the following: what is the interaction between organizational
culture and context and school administrators’ knowledge and motivation? First, the
organizational influences will be listed as an asset or a need. The results are shown in Table 15.
Table 15
Table Title
Organizational Influence Data Need or Asset
6. Schools need the resources
necessary to ensure all staff
and teachers have the training
and tools required to
implement PBIS with
fidelity.
Quant data 92.3%
resources/fully stocked
student store. Qual data
100% have enough
resources. Two average
together is 96%
96%
ASSET.
7. All stakeholders need to
promote a sense of value in
creating multicultural school
norms.
Quant data 64.1%,
value culturally
responsive school
norms. Qual data:
62.5 identify a need.
Therefore, 37.5
valued this. Averaged
50.8%
50%
NEED.
96
In conclusion, organizational barrier, valuing culturally responsive school norms, is one
in which the stakeholders do not value it enough and therefore it may be contributing to the
knowledge gap in best practices for African American students with and without disabilities.
The organizational influence of resources is present and the motivation to reduce suspension
and expulsions for this population is present as well however there is a knowledge gap on
exactly how to achieve equitable outcomes for African American students with and without
disabilities.
97
CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Organizational Performance Goal
In response to findings that administrators overuse exclusionary discipline practices on
African American students nationwide, administrators at California K–12 schools set a global
goal to reduce the percentage of suspensions and expulsions for African American students with
and without disabilities. Specifically, their goal is to decrease suspension and expulsion rates by
13% for African American students with disabilities, from the rate of 30% in 2012 to 17% or
less; for African American students without disabilities, the goal is a 5% decrease, from the
current rate of 9.1% to 4% or less by 2020 (U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil
Rights, 2014). Administrators created this global goal in adherence with the AB 420 Assembly
Bill of 2014; they also drew ideas from state accountability measures suggested by Civil Rights
UCLA (2000), the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Berkeley Law, and Duke University
School of Law. In creating this goal, administrators also ensured that it was in accordance with
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the ADA. School administrators have been
tracking progress towards this goal using a 3-year assessment process beginning in the 2018–
2020 academic year. They will further set annual benchmarks and a three-year summative goal.
The U.S. Department of Education Civil Rights Department will continue to collect and analyze
data regarding the state’s use of exclusionary discipline practices. In this study, the researcher
conducted independent surveys and interviews in California middle and high schools that
evaluate (Clark & Estes Gap Analysis) PBIS strategies on reducing exclusionary discipline
practices for African American students with and without disabilities.
98
Description of Stakeholder Groups
The joint efforts of all stakeholders are necessary to achieve the overall organizational
goal of reducing the disparate use of exclusionary discipline practices on African American
students with disabilities. However, this study focused specifically on educational leaders and
school administrators. The administrators’ goal is to ensure that 100% of teachers implement
culturally competent PBIS procedures (including providing behavior support plans for teaching
children appropriate school conduct) in their daily activities and to encourage teachers’ cultural
responsiveness. Failure to accomplish this goal will lead to continued noncompliance, which in
turn may lead to a loss in funding. Funding losses adversely impact the organization’s ability to
provide education, support, and interventions to its students. Noncompliance may also affect the
organization’s overall goal to reduce the rate of suspensions and expulsion among African
American students with disabilities.
Stakeholders’ Performance Goals
99
Table 16
Organizational Mission, Organizational Performance Goal, and Stakeholder Performance Goals
for California K–12 Schools
Organizational Mission
To uphold federal and state laws in accordance with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation
Act of 1973, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act by not discriminating against people with disabilities (i.e., through exclusion or
unequal treatment; Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund)
Organizational Performance Goal
By the end of the school year 2020, reduce the rate of suspensions and expulsions for African
American students without disabilities by 5% (i.e., from the current rate of 9.1% to 4% or less)
and for African American students with disabilities by 13 % (i.e., from 30% in 2012 to 17% or
less)
Stakeholder Performance Goals
Stakeholder Goal Completion Date
School
Administrators
Ensure 100% of teachers implement culturally competent
PBIS with students
September 2020
Teachers Implement CRPBIS with students September 2020
Students
100% of students able to articulate at least three
multicultural school norms
June 2020
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the degree to which California middle and high
schools achieve their goal of reducing suspension and expulsion rates for African American
students with disabilities. The researcher explored the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences related to achieving this goal, focusing specifically on teachers.
The following questions were used to guide this study:
100
1. By the end of the 2020 academic year, to what extent did California middle and high
schools decrease the rate of exclusionary discipline practices for African American
students with and without disabilities?
2. What are the knowledge and motivations necessary for achieving the stakeholder goal
for administrators to ensure 100% of teachers implement culturally competent PBIS?
3. What is the interaction between organizational culture and context and school
administrators’ knowledge and motivation?
Knowledge Influence Recommendations
For this study, one knowledge influence is procedural and the other is declarative. The
first assumed knowledge influence is educational leaders need to identify best practices for
implementing PBIS for African American students with and without disabilities. The second
assumed knowledge influence is that educational leaders need to identify how to overcome the
barriers to implementing positive behavior interventions and support in middle and high schools.
Identifying best practices and identifying common barriers are high priorities. Since identifying
best practices is a complex and sensitive issue, it is crucial to reduce the stakeholder group’s
cognitive load. Therefore, cognitive load theory drives the researcher’s recommendation
(Kirshner et al., 2006). For the second knowledge influence, identifying how to overcome the
common barriers, metacognition is the appropriate theory is Mayer, (2011). It is important for
educational leaders to reflect on their goals, overcoming common barriers to implementation.
Table 13 depicts the two assumed knowledge influences. Based on the data, each
influence is categorized as either validated, highly probable, or not a validated gap. The
influences are also categorized as, yes, a priority or no, not a priority. A priority reflects a need
and furthermore a need to implement the solution immediately. As shown in Table 17, each
101
knowledge influence is related to a specific principle stemming from a specific theory with a
citation crediting the source of the information. Most importantly, Table 17 includes context-
specific recommendations for the stakeholder group to close the gap in knowledge to reach the
stakeholders’ goal.
102
Table 17
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed
Knowledge
Influence
Validated
as a Need?
Yes, High
Probability
or No (V,
HP, N)
Priority
(Y, N)
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Educational
Leaders need to
identify best
practices for
implementing
PBIS for African
American
students and
African American
students with
disabilities. (D)
V Y Cognitive Load
Theory
Managing intrinsic
load by segmenting
complex material
into simpler parts
and pre-training,
among other
strategies, enables
learning to be
enhanced (Kirshner
et al., 2006).
Provide educational
leaders training on best
practices for reducing
suspension and expulsion
rates starting with
Culturally responsiveness
training/ CRPBIS. Build
upon the training by
offering a choice of
modules: socio-emotional
learning, restorative
justice, and or mental
health.
Identify how to
overcome barriers
to implementing
PBIS in middle
schools and high
schools. (D)
V Y
Metacognition
Learning and
motivation are
enhanced when
learners set goals,
monitor their
performance and
evaluate their
progress towards
achieving their
goals. (Mayer,
2011).
Provide training in which
educational leaders will
first reflect on their prior
knowledge, identifying
what they know and do not
know about the common
barriers to implementing
PBIS at the middle school
and high school. Next the
educational leaders will
share that information with
their peers. Lastly the
educational leaders will be
taught strategies to
mitigate those barriers by
setting achievable
implementation and
fidelity goals.
103
Increasing Educational Leaders’ Knowledge of Best Practices in Decreasing Exclusionary
Discipline for African American Students with Disabilities
The results of this study indicate that 50% of educational leaders need more in-depth
declarative knowledge about the kinds of programs and interventions to use to reduce and
prevent the disparate use of exclusionary discipline practices for African American students and
African American students with disabilities. A recommendation rooted in cognitive load theory
has been selected to close this declarative knowledge gap. Kirshner et al. (2006) found that,
among other strategies, managing intrinsic load by segmenting complex material into simpler
parts and pre-training are methods that help enhance learning. Therefore, providing educational
leaders with pre-training on more complex materials such as implicit bias would support their
learning. The researcher’s recommendation, then, is to provide educational leaders pre-training
on implicit bias, followed by training on culturally responsive positive behavior interventions
and supports, and finally a training on restorative justice.
According to the Supportive School Discipline Initiative (2014), and American Educator
Journal (2015), the recommendations provided by the researcher will support educational leaders
in acquiring knowledge on best practices. Although there is not a standardized method and or a
consensus on best practices for reducing the disparate use of exclusionary discipline practices for
African American students and African American students with disabilities, many proven
methods include implicit bias training, cultural responsiveness training, positive behavior
interventions and supports, and restorative justice. Issues of race and culture are sensitive and
complex; therefore, they have the potential to cause cognitive overload (Purnell, 2005).
Therefore, based on the results of this study, the researcher recommends a series of trainings
including pre-training, which will help break down complex issues into manageable parts,
thereby increasing retention and transfer of skills (Kirshner et al., 2006).
104
Increasing Educational Leaders’ Knowledge of How to Overcome Barriers to
Implementing PBIS at the Middle School and High School Level
The data collected in this study indicates that only 62% educational leaders understand
the types of challenges associated with implementing PBIS at the middle and high school level;
however, they lack metacognitive knowledge on how to overcome those barriers and reach their
stakeholder goal. Metacognition theory can be used to address the gap in common barriers to
implementing PBIS in middle schools and high schools. Specifically, according to Mayer (2011),
learning and motivation are enhanced when learners set goals, monitor their performance, and
evaluate their progress towards achieving their goals. This suggests that providing information to
educational leaders on how to mitigate the common barriers to implementing PBIS at the middle
school and high school levels would support learning and monitoring goals. As a result, the
researcher recommends that educational leaders be able to utilize this knowledge in evaluating
their own progress toward their stakeholder goal.
There is not enough knowledge on barriers to implementing PBIS in middle schools and
high school or sufficient knowledge on how to overcome those barriers. Some researchers have
identified such barriers as lack of buy-in and support from staff, program fidelity, and lack of
leadership (Bradshaw et al., 2015). While extensive research has addressed the effectiveness of
PBIS in elementary schools, there is a dearth of research on implementation for middle schools
and high schools. Therefore, it is important for educational leaders to self-regulate and monitor
their own goals, creating their own knowledge on overcoming the barriers they experience in
implementation. Metacognitive skillfulness will allow educational leaders to identify barriers and
learn to mitigate these barriers through self-reflection and self-regulation. Veenman and Verheij
(2003) found that metacognitive skillfulness on tasks is a strong predictor of both performance
and success. Metacognitive skillfulness contributes to learning. Therefore, the researcher
105
recommends providing training that not only presents knowledge, but also enhances
metacognition.
Motivation Influence Recommendations
For the purposes of this study, the researcher used the research to validate assumptions
concerning three motivation influences. The first motivation influence is that administrators need
to feel efficacious in their ability to implement all three tiers of positive behavior interventions
and strategies at the middle and high school level. The second motivation influence is that
administrators need to value diversity, inclusion, and equity. The third motivation influence is
that administrators need to value decreasing suspension and expulsion rates for African
American students and African American students with disabilities. It is highly probable that all
three motivation influences represent a gap: however, data collection is not complete. Identifying
best practices and identifying common barriers are high priorities. The first motivation influence
is derived from self-efficacy theory (Pajares, 2006). The last two motivation influences are taken
from value theory (Eccles, 2006; Pintrich, 2003).
Table 14 depicts the three assumed motivation influences. Based on the data, each
influence is defined as validated, highly probable, or not a validated gap. The influences are
categorized as, yes, a priority or no, not a priority. A priority reflects a need and furthermore a
need to implement the solution immediately. Table 18 shows that each motivation influence is
related to a specific principle, stemming from an applicable theory. Most importantly, the table
shows the context-specific recommendations for the stakeholder group to close the motivation
gap.
106
Table 18
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Motivation
Influence*
Validated as
a Need
(Yes, High
Probability,
No; V, HP,
N)
Priority
(Y, N)
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Administrators need to
feel efficacious in their
ability to implement all
three tiers of positive
behavior interventions
and supports strategies at
the middle and high
school level. (Self-
Efficacy)
V Y Self-Efficacy
Theory:
Feedback and
modeling
increases self-
efficacy
(Pajares,
2006).
Persistence:
During training, an
instructor models best
practices, and provides
accurate and positive
feedback to the
administrators.
Administrators need to
value diversity,
inclusion, and equity.
(Value Theory)
V Y Value Theory:
Rationales that
include a
discussion of
the importance
and utility
value of the
work or
learning can
help learners
develop
positive values
(Eccles, 2006;
Pintrich,
2003).
Choice:
During training, utilizing
group discussion, learners
will receive important
rationales as to why
diversity, inclusion, and
equity are so important and
how it provides a direct
benefit to them as
educational leaders.
Administrators need to
value decreasing
suspension and expulsion
for African American
and African American
students with disabilities.
(Value Theory)
N Y Value theory:
Higher
expectations
for success
and
perceptions of
confidence
can positively
influence
learning and
motivation
(Eccles, 2006)
Mental Effort:
Administrators will be
provided with incentives,
such as additional
government funding to their
school, for decreasing the
suspensions and expulsion
rates for this population.
107
Administrators Need to Feel Efficacious in their Ability to Implement all Three Tiers of
Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports Strategies at the Middle and High School
Level
The data indicates that 54% of educational leaders do not feel efficacious enough to
implement all three tiers of PBIS at the middle school or high school level. Self-efficacy theory
can be employed to address these gaps in motivation. Specifically, according to Pajares (2006),
feedback and modeling increases self-efficacy. This suggests that providing accurate feedback
and modeling will increase motivation. As a result, the researcher recommends that the training
provided should include modeling and opportunities for the administrators to receive accurate
feedback on their performance. During this training, administrators will be mentored by other
school administrators who are implementing all three tiers of PBIS with high fidelity at their
schools.
Educational leaders need to have enough self-efficacy and confidence in implementing
PBIS to role model / positively influence teachers’ self-efficacy. Previous research suggests that
administrators’ and teachers’ self-efficacy increases when they use research-based behavior
management methods such as PBIS in dealing with problem behavior (Brophy & McCaslin,
1992; Johnson et al., n.d.). More specifically, the practice, commitment, and eventual mastery of
PBIS can increase self-efficacy, metacognition, motivation, persistence, and mental effort
(Brophy & McCaslin, 1992; Johnson et al., n.d.). Providing goal-directed practice coupled with
frequent, accurate, credible, targeted, and private feedback on progress in learning and
performance can increase self-efficacy (Pajares, 2006). Further, it is necessary to provide
administrators with opportunities to observe a credible, similar model by engaging in behavior
that has functional value (Pajares, 2006). Providing accurate feedback and modeling will
increase motivation. Therefore, the researcher recommends that the training provided should
108
include modeling and opportunities for the administrators to receive accurate feedback on their
performance.
Administrators Need to Value Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity
The data indicates that educational leaders do not value and or are not committed to
ensuring diversity, inclusion, and equity at their schools. Only 64.5% of interviewees valued
DEI. Expectancy Value theory can be used to address this gap in motivation. According to
Eccles (2006) and Pintrich (2003), rationales that include a discussion of the importance and
utility value of the work or learning can help learners develop positive values. The researcher
recommends training that emphasizes why it is important to increase diversity, inclusion, and
equity in our educational system. In addition, the training will relate back to the utility value of
doing so.
Educational leaders need to see the value in increasing diversity, inclusion, and equity.
According to Kerby and Burns (2012), increasing diversity in the workforce is key to
successfully competing in a global economy. In order to enter the workforce, it is necessary to
access education. Therefore, by increasing diversity, inclusion, and equity in K-12 education,
there is a better chance of increasing diversity, inclusion, and equity in the workforce. In
addition, Kerby and Burns (2012) noted that increasing diversity is key to problem solving, and
that it drives creativity and innovation. Students’ ability to problem solve is an essential element
in our educational system curriculum. These important rationales are examples of the types of
rationales that will be included in the rationale to increase the value placed on diversity, equity,
and inclusion by educational leaders.
109
Administrators Need to Value Decreasing Suspension and Expulsion for African American
Students and African American Students with Disabilities
The results of this study indicate that 82% of educational leaders do value or are
committed to decreasing the disparate rate of exclusionary discipline practices among African
American students with and without disabilities. Value theory can be used to address this gap in
motivation if it occurred or is needed pertaining to another study. According to Eccles (2006),
higher expectations for success and perceptions of confidence can positively influence learning
and motivation. However, the researcher still recommends that administrators should be
provided with incentives for meeting the high standards of low suspension and expulsion rates,
such as additional government funding for their school. Currently, schools are obtaining
additional money for implementing programs that may help reduce suspension and expulsion
rates. This researcher’s recommendation is that schools should receive a bonus for outcome,
determined and controlled by each school district.
Educational leaders need to value decreasing the suspension and expulsion rates for
African American students with and without disabilities. The American Psychological
Association Zero Tolerance Task Force (2008), and Skiba et al. (2011) have contended that
exclusionary practices impede educational improvement and are ineffective in reducing problem
behaviors. Moreover, a number of researchers posited that children do not learn from such
practices, and that these practices instead lead to further problems such as academic failure,
school dropout, and increased contact with the juvenile justice system (Boneshefski & Runge,
2013; Skiba, 2014; Skiba et al., 2011). Disparate rates of exclusionary discipline practices for
African American students with and without disabilities also contributes to the school-to-prison
pipeline (STPP). Wilson (2014) defined the STPP as “the causal link between educational
exclusion and criminalization of youth” (p. 49). High rates of exclusionary discipline practices
110
are setting a low expectation that this population belongs in jail instead of in the classroom. This
low expectation comes with a high societal cost. Mass incarceration costs $182 billion per year
and does little to increase public safety or reduce crime (eji.org). It costs over $34,000 a year on
average to incarcerate a prisoner (American Civil Liberties Union, 2008). On the other hand—in
relation to the benefits of graduating high school and attending college— bachelor’s degree
holders tend to contribute $278,000 more to their local economy, $44,000 in state and local
taxes, and $771,000 more in annual individual charitable giving over their lifetime
(collegepossible.org). Providing financial incentives and higher expectations to help keep this
population in school and on a path to graduation will increase the motivation and value of the
task.
Organizational Influence Recommendations
The researcher identified two organizational influences based on the literature and
validated by the results of this study. The first organizational influence, a cultural setting, is that
schools need the resources to ensure that all staff and teachers have the training and tools
required to implement PBIS with fidelity. Ensuring that staff resource needs are being met
correlates with increased student learning outcomes (Waters et al., 2003). The second assumed
organizational influence, a cultural model, is that all stakeholders need to promote a sense of
value in creating multicultural school norms. Diversity theories for organizational influence are
used to address this gap. Effective leaders address institutional policies and practices that create
barriers for equity (Bensimon, 2005). It is highly probable that both organizational influences
represent a gap: however, data collection is not complete.
Table 15 depicts the two assumed organizational influences. As shown in the table, each
organizational influence is related to a specific principle with a corresponding citation. Most
111
importantly, Table 19 highlights context-specific recommendations for the stakeholder group to
close the organizational gap and work towards reaching the stakeholders’ goal.
Table 19
Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations
Assumed
Organization
Influence*
Validated as
a Gap (Yes,
High
Probability,
No; V, HP,
N)
Priority
(Y, N)
Principle and
Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Schools need the
resources necessary to
ensure all staff and
teachers have the
training and tools
required to implement
PBIS with fidelity
(cultural setting).
N Y Ensuring staff’s
resource needs
are being met is
correlated with
increased student
learning
outcomes (Waters
et al., 2003).
The administrators will
align the allocation of
resources with the goals
and priorities of PBIS
implementation.
All stakeholders need
to promote a sense of
value in creating
multicultural school
norms (cultural
model).
V Y Effective leaders
address
institutional
policies and
practices that
create barriers for
equity Bensimon
(2005).
Administrators will
solicit support from
educational leaders and
teachers to revise
policies that require a
more inclusive
perspective.
Schools Need the Resources to Ensure all Staff and Teachers Have the Training and Tools
Required to Implement PBIS with Fidelity
The results of this study indicate that 96% of schools do have the resources to properly
implement PBIS. Ensuring staff resource needs are being met correlates with improved student
learning outcomes (Waters et al., 2003). If and when needed the researcher would recommend
that administrators align the allocation of resources with the goals and priorities of PBIS
implementation. Resources include proper training for all staff, administrators, and teachers, as
112
well as tangible reinforcement / rewards for the students. Educational leaders will prioritize,
value, and align the allocation of resources with the implementation of PBIS.
Resources, in terms of training for staff and rewards for students, are part of the overall
school climate. Thapa et al. (2013) suggested that a positive school climate correlates with the
belief that teachers and educational leaders can positively affect student learning, manage their
classrooms, reduce disruptive behaviors, and decrease attrition. Positive school climate promotes
safer, more supportive schools, increases drop-out prevention, and is directly related to student
achievement (Thapa et al., 2013). School climate is directly related to student achievement and a
decrease in suspension rates.
All Stakeholders Need to Promote a Sense of Value in Creating Multicultural School
Norms
The data indicates that schools lack multicultural norms. Fifty-point eight percent of
interviewees identified this as a need. Similarly, previous research suggests that effective leaders
address institutional policies and practices that create barriers for equity (Bensimon, 2005). The
lack of inclusiveness for minority students creates barriers for equity, facilitating a situation in
which African American students with and without disabilities experience disparate exclusionary
discipline practices. Therefore, the researcher’s recommendation is that administrators should
solicit support from educational leaders and teachers to revise policies that require a more
inclusive perspective.
All educational stakeholders need to see the value in creating multicultural school norms.
The CRPBIS framework operationalizes cultural responsiveness as an inclusive decision-making
process (Bal, 2018). Recent research has provided evidence of CRPBIS’ effectiveness. For
example, the Learning Lab commonly used in CRPBIS is a new methodology to create
systematic change regarding behavioral outcomes and school discipline (Bal et al., 2018). When
113
PBIS were combined with other, culturally responsive interventions, they were more effective in
reducing suspensions for this population (Bal, 2018; Kourea et al., 2016). Research suggests that
multicultural practices should be embedded into PBIS strategies.
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
The model that supports the implementation and evaluation plan is the New World
Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016), based on the original Kirkpatrick Four
Level Model of Evaluation (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2006). This model suggests that
evaluation plans start with the goals of the organization and work backwards and that, by doing
so, the “leading indicators” that bridge recommended solutions to the organization’s goals are
both easier to identify and more closely aligned with organizational goals. Further, this “reverse
order” of the New World Kirkpatrick Model allows for a sequence of three other actions: a) first,
the development of solution outcomes that focus on assessing work behaviors, b) next, the
identification of indicators that learning occurred during implementation, and c) finally, the
emergence of indicators that organizational members are satisfied with implementation
strategies. Designing the implementation and evaluation plan in this manner forces connections
between the immediate solutions and the larger goal and solicits proximal “buy in” to ensure
success (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Organizational Purpose, Need and Expectations
The purpose of California public schools is to educate children. Part of the mission of
California K–12 schools is to uphold federal and state laws, acting in accordance with Section
504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), and
the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). These laws prohibit discrimination
114
against people with disabilities in programs that receive federal financial assistance, like
California K–12 schools. Further compliance with the law protects children and adults with
disabilities from exclusion and unequal treatment in schools, jobs, and the community (Disability
Rights Education & Defense Fund). Another aspect of California K–12 schools’ mission is to
adhere to the AB 420 Assembly Bill of 2014, which limits the use of exclusionary discipline.
This project examined the barriers—including motivational, organizational, and
knowledge and skills barriers—that prevent administrators from implementing measures to
reduce the occurrence disparate exclusionary discipline practices. The researcher therefore
proposes a solution involving a comprehensive training program, related on-the-job supports,
and a shift in the incentive system for reductions in the use of exclusionary discipline, in order to
produce the desired outcome: reducing the disparate use of exclusionary discipline practices for
African American students with and without disabilities.
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
Based on the Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) model, relating training, performance,
and results is necessary for mission-critical programs. Tables 21 and 22 show the proposed Level
4: Results and Leading Indicators in the form of outcomes, metrics, and methods for both
external and internal outcomes for educational leaders. If the internal outcomes are met as
expected, as a result of training and organizational support that enables educational leaders to
perform on the job, then the external outcomes should also be realized.
115
Table 20
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for Internal Outcomes
Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
Increase in
multicultural school
norms.
The number of multicultural
norms created during
implementation is higher than
the previous year before
implementation.
Administrators will solicit data
from school on norms from
prior years. Compare
implementation year to prior
year.
Increase in faculty
cultural responsiveness
training.
The time spent training on
cultural responsiveness has
increased from prior year before
implementation.
Administrators will solicit data
on training and number of hours
in training from previous year
before implementation.
Compare implementation year
to prior year.
Increase in school
resources allocated to
PBIS implementation.
The amount of money spent on
PBIS and other programs
designed to reduce exclusionary
discipline practices has increased
from the previous year before
implementation.
Administrators will solicit
financial records from previous
year and budget, and records
from years of implementation
and compare.
Increased in of PBIS
rewards given out to
students especially
African American
students.
The number of rewards given out
in aggregate to African
American students.
Administrators will solicit data
from teachers on the aggregate
number of rewards for African
American students with and
without disabilities.
Increased participation
from all stakeholders in
creating multicultural
norms.
Collecting demographic
information on participants.
Administrators will solicit
information on those
participating in the creation of
school norms.
116
Table 21
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External Outcomes
Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
Decreased number of
office referrals for
African American
students.
The number of office referrals for
African American students.
Administrators will solicit data
on the aggregate number of
office referrals for African
American students with and
without disabilities.
Decreased number of
office referrals for
African American
students with
disabilities.
The number of office referrals for
African American students with
disabilities.
Administrators will solicit data
on the aggregate number of
office referrals for African
American students with and
without disabilities.
Decreases in
exclusionary discipline
practices for African
American students.
The number of suspensions and
expulsions for African American
students is lower than the previous
year before the recommended
implementation.
Administrators will solicit real
time data from schools on their
aggregate suspension and
expulsion rates and compare
with previous years.
Decreases in
exclusionary discipline
practices for African
American students
with disabilities.
The number of suspensions and
expulsions for African American
students with disabilities is lower
than the previous year before the
recommended implementation.
Administrators will solicit data
from state and county websites
on suspensions and expulsion
rates and compare with on
prior years.
Level 3: Behavior
Critical Behaviors
According to Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) critical behaviors are clearly identified
actions / behaviors that, when constantly exhibited by the primary stakeholder group, can bring
about change and the achievement of organizational outcomes. The stakeholders of interest in the
present study are the administrators responsible for decreasing the suspension and expulsion
rates for African American students with and without disabilities. The first critical behavior that
is important among this stakeholder group is that administrators must exhibit signs of cultural
117
responsiveness. Second, administrators should perform the critical behavior of allocating
resources and, in particular, should allocate resources for CRPBIS. Third, administrators must
provide adequate training opportunities. Fourth, they must have the ability to gather aggregate
data and monitor real-time updates on exclusionary discipline rates. The fifth critical behavior is
that administrators must ensure a high degree of fidelity when implementing PBIS. The sixth is
that administrators must provide feedback and evaluate teachers on CRPBIS. The specific
metrics, methods, and timing for each of these outcome behaviors appears in Table 22.
118
Table 22
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation
Critical Behavior Metric(s)
Method(s)
Timing
Administrators correctly
identify African
American cultural
responsiveness
strategies.
Number of
correct
responses on a
test.
Test educational leader’s
and teacher’s knowledge.
Done within a week
after formal training
concludes.
Administrators are
allocating resources.
Budget and
expense reports
Add protocols for
administrators to allocate
resources and specially
allocate resources to
PBIS.
Monthly
Administrators are
providing professional
development
opportunities.
Number of
trainings
provided.
Add protocols for
administrators to provide
teachers with 2-3
professional development
training a year.
biannually
Administrators
demonstrate awareness
of aggregate data in
exclusionary discipline
rates.
Number of
times data is
collected.
Add protocols for
gathering daily/weekly
updates
Immediately and
weekly.
Administrators
demonstrate a high
fidelity in implementing
PBIS.
Number of
correct
responses
observed.
Fidelity checklist Immediately and
weekly
Administrators are
providing feedback and
evaluating teachers on
CRPBIS.
Number of
evaluating
criteria on
teachers’
evaluation.
Add protocols for
evaluating teachers on
CRPBIS.
Done within a week
after formal training
concludes and
monthly thereafter
Required Drivers
The New World Kirkpatrick Model demonstrates the relationship between required
drivers and the ability for stakeholders to meet their goals. Required drivers support, monitor,
119
encourage, and reward the performance of critical behaviors (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
In the context of the present study, administrators require the support of experts in the field, their
superintendents, and the organization to reinforce what they learn in training and to encourage
them to apply what they have learned to reduce disparate rates of exclusionary discipline for
their African American students with or without disabilities. Rewards should be established for
the achievement of performance goals to enhance the organizational support of the
administrators. Table 23 shows the recommended drivers to support administrators’ critical
behaviors.
Table 23
Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing
Critical
Behaviors
Supported
1, 2, 3 Etc.
Reinforcing: Increased funding for schools
based on reduced exclusionary discipline
practices
Annually-each school year 2,4
Encouraging: Mentoring by experts in the
field
Each quarter or every three
months school is in session
1,3,6
Rewarding: Recognition by the coalition of
PBIS
Annually 5
Monitoring: State reporting/ school report
cards
Annually 6
Organizational Support
Resources and time will need to be allocated in order to implement the organizational
change plan. Administrators will need to ensure that resources are allocated to achieve this goal.
Necessary resources include adequate training, tangible rewards for students, and time allocated
to create multicultural norms. Specifically, organizational communication and policies need to be
120
aligned to adequately prioritize and reinforce the importance of these activities. Additional
financial resources may also be necessary to support the establishment of internal
communication mechanisms in order to effectively communicate activities under this plan to the
entire organization.
Level 2: Learning
Learning Goals
Following the completion of the recommended solutions, most notably in the course, the
administrators will be able to:
1. Recognize best practices in reducing suspensions and expulsions for African
American students with and without disabilities (D)
2. Interpret African American communication, socialization, and cultural norms (D)
3. Recognize how to overcome barriers to implementing PBIS in middle schools and
high schools (D)
4. Allocate resources to facilitate the implementation of PBIS and CRPBIS (P)
5. Provide professional development opportunities for teachers (P)
6. Model and evaluate teachers on cultural responsiveness (P)
7. Consistently monitor and assess the rate of suspensions and expulsions for African
American students with and without disabilities (P)
8. Model and evaluate teachers on their fidelity in implementing PBIS (P)
9. Create multicultural school norms (P)
10. Exhibit confidence that they can reduce the disparate use of exclusionary discipline
for African American students with and without disabilities (Confidence)
121
11. Value reducing suspensions and expulsions for African American students with and
without disabilities (Value)
12. Value diversity, equity, and inclusion (Value)
Program
The learning goals listed in the previous section will be achieved with a training program
that includes an in-depth exploration of best practices for reducing disparate exclusionary
discipline practices. The administrators will study a broad range of topics pertaining to reducing
suspension and expulsions for African American students with and without disabilities. The
program is blended, consisting of five e-learning modules and five face-to-face application
workshops. The total time for completion is 2,700 minutes (45 hours) per participant. The
training will be broken down each day into the following sections: implicit bias training (1 day),
cultural responsiveness and / or CRPBIS (2 days), and restorative justice (2 days).
An e-learning module will precede the face-to-face training each day, front-loading the
learner and functioning as a job aid for the administrators each day. During the implicit bias e-
learning modules, learners will be provided a test to discover their implicit biases. During the
cultural responsiveness e-learning modules, learners will be provided a job aid of ethnographic
reference texts on African American communication, socialization, and cultural norms. During
the restorative justice e-learning modules, learners will be provided a job aid of key terms and
references regarding key components of restorative justice. Following the demonstrations, the
learners will have the opportunity to practice using the job aids and will receive feedback from
the learning management system, their peers, and the instructor.
During the synchronous in-person sessions, the focus will be on applying what learners
have learned asynchronously to authentic best practices for reducing disparate rates of
122
exclusionary discipline practices for African American students with and without disabilities in
training groups, role-playing, and discussions.
Evaluation of the Components of Learning
Demonstrating declarative knowledge is often necessary as a precursor to applying that
knowledge to solve problems (Clark & Estes, 2008; Krathwohl, 2002). Evaluating learning for
both declarative and procedural knowledge is important. It is also important that learners value
the training as a prerequisite to using their newly learned knowledge and skills on the job.
However, they must also be confident that they can succeed in applying their knowledge and
skills and be committed to using them on the job. As such, Table 24 lists the evaluation methods
and timing for these components of learning.
Table 24
Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program
Method(s) or Activity(ies) Timing
Declarative
Knowledge “I
know it.”
Knowledge checks using multiple
choice on African American cultural
norms/patterns.
In the asynchronous portions
of the course during and
after course.
Main components of cultural
responsiveness
In the asynchronous portions
of the course during and
after course.
Main components of restorative justice In the asynchronous portions
of the course during and
after course.
Overcoming barriers to implementing
PBIS in middle schools and high
schools
In the asynchronous portions
of the course during and
after course.
Procedural Skills “I
can do it right
now.”
Demonstration in groups and
individually of using the job aid on how
to allocate resources for PBIS
During workshop
123
Demonstration in groups and
individually of using the job aid on how
to evaluate teachers on CRPBIS
During workshop
Level 1: Reaction
The purpose of Level 1 of Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2016) model is to evaluate
participants’ reactions to training. In other words, did the participants find the training favorable,
Attitude “I
believe this is
worthwhile.”
Instructor’s observation of participants’
statements and actions demonstrating that
they see the benefit of reducing suspensions
and expulsions for African American
students with and without disabilities
During workshop
Attitude “I
believe this is
worthwhile.”
Confidence “I
think I can do it
on the job.”
Discussions of the value of tangible rewards
for students
During workshop
Retrospective pre- and post-test assessment
item on the value and benefits of increased
professional development for teachers
After workshop
Instructor’s observation of participants’
statements and actions demonstrating that
they see the benefit of increasing diversity,
equity, and inclusion
During workshop
Survey items using scaled items on their
confidence in reducing suspensions and
expulsions for African American students
with and without disabilities.
Following each
module/lesson/unit in the
asynchronous portions of
the course
Commitment “I
will do it on the
job.”
Retrospective pre- and post-test assessment
item on achieving stakeholder goal of 100%
implementation of culturally competent
PBIS.
During and after training
Commitment “I
will do it on the
job.”
Create an individual action plan on reducing
suspensions and expulsions for African
American students with and without
disabilities.
After training
124
engaging, and relevant to their jobs? This level is the most simplistic, least time consuming, and
most able to capture participants’ perception of the quality of a program and an instructor. Table
26 illustrates the tools used to measure the reactions of participants to the training program and
will be used to gage the participants’ reaction, engagement, and satisfaction evaluation.
Table 26
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Engagement
Data analytics in the learning
management system
Ongoing during asynchronous
portion of the course.
Completion of online
modules/lessons/units
Ongoing during asynchronous
portion of the course.
Observation by instructor/facilitator During the workshop
Attendance During the workshop
Course evaluation Last day of training
Asking meaningful questions During the workshop
Relevance
Brief pulse-check with participants via
survey (online) and discussion (ongoing)
After every
module/lesson/unit and the
workshop
Customer
Satisfaction
Course evaluation Last day of training
Evaluation Tools
Immediately Following the Program Implementation
During the asynchronous portion of the course, the learning analytics tool in the online
learning website will collect data about the start, duration, and completion of modules by the
participants. These data will indicate the engagement with the course material. Brief surveys will
be distributed after each module requesting the participant to indicate the relevance of the
125
material to their job performance and their overall satisfaction with the content and delivery of
the online course; these surveys will be collected online.
For Level 1, during the in-person workshop, the instructor will conduct periodic, brief
“pulse-checks” by asking the participants about the relevance of the content to their work and the
organization, delivery, and learning environment. Level 2 will include checks for understanding
using meaningful questions and scenarios drawn from the content.
Delayed for a Period after the Program Implementation
Approximately four weeks after the implementation of the training, and then again at
eight weeks, the trainer will administer a survey containing open and scaled items using the
blended evaluation approach for measurement. More specifically, from the participant’s
perspective, this evaluation tool will measure: satisfaction and relevance of the training (Level
1); the confidence and value of applying their training (Level 2); and the administrators’
retention of knowledge pertaining to cultural responsiveness, socio-emotional learning,
restorative justice, mental health, and implicit bias training (Level 3). Lastly, this evaluation tool
will provide information on the extent to which administrators have been able to reduce disparate
rates of exclusionary discipline for African American students with and without disabilities.
Data Analysis and Reporting
The Level 4 goal regarding educational leaders in California middle schools and high
schools is measured by reduction in suspension rates of African American students with and
without disabilities. Each month, the reviewer will track the rates of disparate exclusionary
discipline rates for African American students with and without disabilities. California has a pre-
existing dashboard, which will be adapted to report monthly
(https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/cm/suspratecal.asp). A similar dashboard, shown in Figure 7, will
126
report the data on these measures as a monitoring and accountability tool. Similar dashboards
will be created to monitor Levels 1, 2, and 3.
Figure 6
Dashboard
Summary
The New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) employs a
reversed planning approach towards training that focused on desired organizational results,
behaviors, learning, and reactions. First, level four model focuses on the desired organizational
results prioritizing the achievement of the organizational goal. This desired outcome guides the
127
training framework and then provided a path from results to desired behaviors, required learning,
and engagement, among educational leaders. An implementation plan was developed by
identifying the critical behaviors and required drivers necessary for educational
leaders/educational leaders to meet organizational results. In applying this model an integrated
implementation and evaluation plan aligns training activities with the desired organizational
outcomes. Lastly, Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) emphasize the importance in asking data
analysis questions and requires that expectations are being met for each of the four levels.
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach
As with any methodological approach, there are strengths and weaknesses. First, the
strengths in using the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework was that the study
identified a major lack of knowledge impacting educational leaders’ ability to achieve their
stakeholder goal. Secondly, the study uncovered gaps in motivation and an important
organizational barrier. In terms of weakness, the gap analysis framework has major limitations
adapting to study like this, that address issues of equity, diversity, and inclusion. Other
methodological approaches, such as critical race theory, may have been better suited to
thoroughly address organizational barriers rooted in systematic and institutional racism.
However, Clark and Estes’ integration of the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016) aided in providing a robust plan that is data-driven for California middle and
high schools to consider.
Limitations and Delimitations
There were several limitations and delimitations in the design of the study. A limitation
of the study is the researcher cannot control the truthfulness of the respondents. All survey
questions, interview protocols, and survey procedures were of the researcher's design adapted
128
from existing instruments requiring additional strategies to construct more validity and
reliability. The study is of the researcher’s interest and knowledge and may reflect some personal
bias. First, is the stakeholder group of focus. For accessibility, the researcher chose
administrators because the educational leaders’ contact information is typically published on the
school’s website. Although, teachers might have been the most knowledgeable and truthful, in
this study, they were not as easy to access. If the school website published teachers’ contact
information to begin with, many times it would be in the staff directory, making it hard to
distinguish the actual teachers. Secondly, a list of schools implementing PBIS with at least 40%
fidelity or higher was easily accessible. A list of schools implementing culturally responsive
positive interventions and supports (CRPBIS) was even harder to find. Through the literature
review, CRPBIS has been associated with a greater reduction however, it also the most
inaccessible, as this intervention is newer and much harder to research. In addition, SWPRD has
been associated with the greatest reduction, however it is new and harder to research as well.
Therefore, for the purpose of this study, the focus is PBIS. Therefore, PBIS strategies, were the
most accessible to research and easier for schools to implement. With still only roughly 10% of
California K-12 schools are implementing PBIS with 40% fidelity or higher. This problem lends
itself well to Clark and Estes Gap Analysis Framework.
During and after the data collection, the first limitation is that the study was rushed due to
the Coronavirus pandemic. Due to Covid-19 the IRB approval was delayed significantly which
negatively impacted the scope, duration, and the potential participants in the project. The first
negative impact of the Coronavirus was in the selection process. The researcher had intentions to
check not only the demographics of the county each school was located in but also the
demographics of the school itself. Unfortunately, due to time constraints the researcher was only
129
able to check the county demographics ensuring that the county the school was located in had at
least a 5% or more population of African American students. With that said, one participant
during the interviews acknowledged that her population of African American students fell below
5%.
Secondly, Covid-19 could have negatively impacted the response rate for both the
qualitative and quantitative sections of this study. The response rate for the surveys was 21% and
for the interviews only 9 out of 13 participants responded. A few participants stated that they
wanted to participate in the study, but they were scrambling to adjust to online learning, closing
out the school year, and trying to think about what the start of the next school year would entail.
In addition to the Coronavirus pandemic, a few weeks after the onset of the survey, the racial
justice pandemic and demonstrations broke out. The issue of racial equality under President
Trump became a very divisive and polarizing issue. The impact of this could have been positive
or negative on the response rate. One interviewee stated that she was so excited and passionate
about the Black Lives Matter Movement. Participants in the survey were offered a $5 Amazon
electronic gift card, and participants of the interviews were offered a $25 Amazon e-gift card,
both in attempt to offset potentially lower response rates due to multiple global pandemics. Only
66% of the survey respondents and 50% of the interview respondents accepted the gift cards.
However, this could have impacted the participants responses.
Another major limitation due to Covid-19 was the incompletion of a thorough document
analysis to fully answer the first research question. All data collection was limited to five weeks
total. Moreover, data analysis and the completion of this dissertation was rushed and completed
in four weeks.
130
Future Research
This study implicates new areas of research. More research is needed on the overall
effectiveness or ineffectiveness of PBIS for African American students. There is not much
research on how to overcome barriers of implementing PBIS in middle schools and high schools.
This study highlights some barriers but much more in depth research is needed. Research on
culturally responsiveness teaching or training (CRT) and or culturally responsive positive
behavior interventions and supports (CRPBIS) and potentially equitable outcomes for African
American students is an area for future research. Implicit bias training and restorative justice
(SWPRD) are among the recommendations put forth in this study and more research on those
strategies in relation to middle schools, high school, and African American students with and
without disabilities is also needed. A repeat of this study with a better response rate/more
respondents and the completion of document analysis is needed. A repeat of this study in a few
years is highly encouraged and may yield different results showing progress of newly
implemented strategies.
Conclusion
This study aimed to evaluate PBIS in reducing exclusionary discipline practices for
African American students with and without disabilities in California middle and high schools.
Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis was employed in this study as the conceptual and
methodological framework. The study evaluated potential gaps in knowledge, motivation, and
organizational barriers that prevent educational leaders from implementing culturally competent
positive behavior interventions and supports. The assessment of research question one indicates
that California middle schools and high schools are far from reaching their global goal and have
made little to no progress. However, it is important to note that the Coronavirus pandemic
131
limited the researcher’s ability to conduct a thorough document analysis. The assessment of
research question two indicates that is a significant lack of knowledge on best practices in
reducing suspensions for African American students with and without disabilities. In addition,
there is a substantial lack of motivation in promoting and or communicating the value of equity,
diversity, and inclusion. The assessment of research question three unpacks an organizational
barrier of creating multicultural school norms which are crucial in implementing culturally
responsiveness positive behavior interventions and supports. In conclusion, PBIS when paired
with culturally responsiveness/competency (CRPBIS), implicit bias training, and restorative
justice can create equitable outcomes for African American students with and without disabilities
in closing the discipline gap. The researcher is hopeful! The data concludes that many of the
California middle and high schools involved in this study were starting (within the last school
year) to incorporate an element of cultural responsiveness, implicit bias training, or restorative
justice in conjunction with PBIS. The researcher does believe these positive changes will
eventually reflect in the data over the next couple of years and suspensions rates for African
American students will significantly decrease.
132
References
Aguinis, H., & Kraiger, K. (2009). Benefits of training and development for individuals and
teams, organizations, and society. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 451–474.
https://doi.org/x10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163505
Albdour, A. A., & Altarawneh, I. I. (2014). Employee engagement and organizational
commitment: Evidence from Jordan. International Journal of Business, 19(2), 192.
Anderman, E. & Anderman, L. (2006). Attributions. http://www.education.
com/reference/article/attribution-theory/.
American Civil Liberties Union. (2008). Locating the school-to-prison pipeline. Retrieved
from http://www.aclu.org/images/asset_upload_file966_35553.pdf [Google Scholar]
American Psychological Association Zero Tolerance Task Force. (2008). Are zero tolerance
policies effective in the schools? American Psychologist, 63(9), 852–862.
Associated Press. (2010, December 7). In ranking, U.S. students trail global leaders. USA Today.
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/education/2010-12-07-us-students-international-
ranking_N.htm.
Bailey, J., & Du Plessis, D. (1997). Understanding principals’ attitudes towards inclusive
schooling. Journal of Educational Administration, 35(5), 428–438.
Baker, L. (2006). Metacognition. http://www.education.com/reference/article/metacognition/
Bal, A. (2018). Culturally responsive positive behavioral interventions and supports: A process–
oriented framework for systemic transformation. Review of Education, Pedagogy, and
Cultural Studies, 40(2), 144–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/10714413.2017.1417579
133
Bambara, L., Goh, A., Kern, L., & Caskie, G. (2012). Perceived barriers and enablers to
implementing individualized positive behavior interventions and supports in school
settings. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 14(4), 228–240.
Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes, 50, 248–287.
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 9(3), 75–78.
Barshay, J. (2018) Two studies point to the power of teacher-student relationships to boost
learning. Hechinger Report
Bear, G. (2013). Teacher resistance to frequent rewards and praise: Lack of skill or a wise
decision? Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 23(4), 318–340.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10474412.2013.845495
Bensimon, E. (2005). Closing the achievement gap in higher education: An organizational
learning perspective. New Directions for Higher Education, 2005(131), 99–111.
https://doi.org/10.1002/he.190
BET. (2019). Finding justice [Video].
Bireda, M. R. (2002). Eliminating racial profiling in school discipline: Cultures in conflict.
Scarecrow Press.
Blake, J. J., Perez, E., & Darensbourg, A. (2010). Overrepresentation of African American males
in exclusionary discipline: The role of school-based mental health professionals in
dismantling the school to prison pipeline. Journal of African American Males in
Education, 1(3), 196–211.
134
Boneshefski, M. J., & Runge, T. (2013). Addressing disproportionate discipline practices with a
School-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports framework: A practical
guide for calculating and using disproportionality rates. Journal of Positive Behavior
Interventions, 16(3), 149–158.
Bradshaw, C. P., Pas, E. T., Debnam, K. J., & Lindstrom Johnson, S. (2015). A focus on
implementation of positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS) in high schools:
Associations with bullying and other indicators of school disorder. School Psychology
Review, 44(4), 480-498. https://doi.org/10.17105/spr-15-0105.1
Bright, L. (2008). Does public service motivation really make a difference in the job satisfaction
and turnover intentions of public employees? The American Review of Public
Administration, 38(2), 149–166.
Brock, M., Kriger, N., & Miró, R. (2017). School safety policies and programs administered by
the US federal government: 1990–2016. In Washington, DC: Library of Congress.
Brophy, J., & McCaslin, M. (1992). Educational leaders’ reports of how they perceive and cope
with problem students. Elementary School Journal, 93(1), 3–68.
Brownstein, R. (2010). Pushed out. The Education Digest, 75(7), 23–27.
Bruhn, A., Gorsh, J., Hannan, C., & Hirsch, S. (2014). Simple strategies for reflecting on and
responding to common criticisms of PBIS. Journal of Special Education Leadership,
27(1), 13–25.
California Department of Education. Suspension rate calculation
https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/cm/suspratecal.asp
California PBIS Coalition. (2016). California PBIS Recognition Process 2016/2017
Recognized Schools.
135
https://www.placercoe.k12.ca.us/departments/educationalservices/prevention/cpc/pb
is/Pages/staterecognition1617.aspx
Carpenter, S. K. (2012). Testing enhances the transfer of learning. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 21(5), 279–283.
Chitiyo, M., & Wheeler, J. (2009). Challenges faced by school educational leaders in
implementing positive behavior interventions and supports in their school systems.
Remedial and Special Education, 30(1), 58–63.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932508315049
Christle, C., Jolivette, K., & Nelson, C. (2005). Breaking the school to prison pipeline:
Identifying school risk and protective factors for youth delinquency. Exceptionality,
13(2), 69–88.
Civil Rights Project UCLA. (2000). Opportunities suspended: The devastating consequences of
zero tolerance and school discipline. https://www.civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/research/k-
12-education/school-discipline/opportunities-suspended-the-devastating-consequences-
of-zero-tolerance-and-school-discipline-policies/crp-opportunities-suspended-zero-
tolerance-2000.pdf
Clark, R. (n.d.) Gap analysis: Learning and motivation.
https://2sc.rossieronline.usc.edu/mod/page/view.php?id=145207
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Information Age Publishing.
Clonan, S., McDougal, J., & Clark, K. (2007). Use of office discipline referrals in schoolwide
decision making: A practical example. Psychology in the Schools, 44(1), 19–27.
doi:10.1002/pits.20202
136
Costenbader, V., & Markson, S. (1998). School suspension: A study with secondary school
students. Journal of School Psychology, 36(1), 59–82.
Creswell, J. W. (2008). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. SAGE.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. SAGE.
Davis, D. E. (2009). Preparing white student teachers through a critical consultative
interaction model. International Journal of Progressive Education, 5(2), 23–41
Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., Ryan, R. M., & Cameron, J. (2001). Extrinsic rewards and intrinsic
motivation in education: Reconsidered once again. Review of Educational Research,
71(1), 1–51.
Del Gandio, J., & Nocella II, A. (2014). Educating for Action: Ten Strategies to Ignite Social
Justice. New Society Publishers.
Desai, P., Karahalios, V., Persuad, S., & Reker, K. (2014). A social justice perspective on social-
emotional learning. Communique, 43(1), 14–16.
Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
https://dredf.org/legal-advocacy/laws/section-504-of-the-rehabilitation-act-of-1973/
Duke University School of Law. Instead of suspension.
https://law.duke.edu/childedlaw/schooldiscipline/downloads/instead_of_suspension.pdf
Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K. B. (2011). The
impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta-analysis of school-
based universal interventions. Child Development, 82(1), 405-432.
137
Eccles, J. (2006). Expectancy value motivational theory.
http://www.education.com/reference/article/expectancy-value-motivational-theory/
Eccles (Parsons), J. et al. (1983). Expectancies, values and academic behaviors. In J. Spence
(Ed.), Achievement and Achievement Motivation (pp. 75–146). W. H. Freeman and Co.
Elias, M. J., Zins, J. E., Weissberg, R. P., Frey, K. S., Greenberg, M. T., Haynes, N. M., …
Shriver, T. (1997). Promoting social and emotional learning: Guidelines for educators.
ASCD.
Ellickson, M. C., & Logsdon, K. (2001). Determinants of job satisfaction of municipal
government employees. State and Local Government Review, 33(3), 173–184.
Ellickson, M. C., & Logsdon, K. (2002). Determinants of job satisfaction of municipal
government employees. Public Personnel Management, 31(3), 343–358.
Fenning, P., & Rose, J. (2007). Overrepresentation of African American students in exclusionary
discipline: The role of school policy. Urban Education, 42(6), 536–559.
Feuerborn, L., & Chinn, D. (2012). Teacher perceptions of student needs and implications for
positive behavior interventions and supports. Behavioral Disorders, 37(4), 219–231.
https://doi.org/10.1177/019874291203700403
Feuerborn, L., Wallace, C., & Tyre, A. (2016). A qualitative analysis of middle and high school
teacher perceptions of schoolwide positive behavior interventions and supports. Journal
of Positive Behavior Interventions, 18(4), 219–229. doi:10.1177/1098300716632591
Fine, M., Weis, L., & Powell, L. (1997). Communities of difference: A critical look at
desegregated spaces created for and by youth. Harvard Educational Review, 67(2), 247–
285. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.67.2.g683217368m50530
138
Gage, N., Whitford, D., Katsiyannis, A., Adams, S., & Jasper, A. (2019). National analysis of the
disciplinary exclusion of Black students with and without disabilities. Journal of Child
and Family Studies, 28(7), 1754–1764. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-019-01407
Gagné, M., & Bhave, D. (2011). Autonomy in the workplace: An essential ingredient to
employee engagement and well-being in every culture. In Human autonomy in cross-
cultural context (pp. 163-187).
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist, 36,
Garvin, D. A., Edmondson, A. C., & Gino, F. (2008, March). Is yours a learning organization?
Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2008/03/is-yours-a-learning-organization.
Geertz, C. (1973). "Thick Description: Toward an Interpretive Theory of Culture", The
Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays, New York: Basic Books, pp. 3–30.
Gibbs, G. R., (2007). Thematic coding and categorizing. In Analyzing qualitative data. SAGE.
Glesne, C. (2011). But is it ethical? Considering what is right. In Becoming qualitative
researchers: An introduction (pp. 162-183).
Gottfredson, D. (2001). Schools and delinquency. Cambridge University Press.
Hatt, B. (2011). Still I rise: Youth caught between the worlds of schools and prisons. Urban
Review, 43(4), 476-490. https://doi.org/10.1007/sl1256-011-0185-y
Heilbrun, A., Cornell, D., & Lovegrove, P. (2015). Principal attitudes regarding zero tolerance
and racial disparities in school suspensions. Psychology in the Schools, 52(5), 489–499.
https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21838
Heitzeg A. N. (2009). Education or incarceration: Zero tolerance policies and the school to
prison pipeline. Forum on Public Policy Online, 2009(2), 1–21.
139
Hirbayashi, K. (n.d.). How do we identify organizational influences on performance?
https://2sc.rossieronline.usc.edu/mod/page/view.php?id=109259
Hoffman, D. M. (2009). Reflecting on social emotional learning. A critical perspective on trends
in the United States. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 533-556.
doi:10.3102/0034654308325184
Howard, T., & Gay, G. (n.d.). Why race and culture matter in schools: closing the achievement
gap in America’s classrooms (2nd ed.). Teachers College Press.
Johnson, A., Anhalt, K., & Cowan, R. (2017). Culturally responsive school-wide positive
behavior interventions and supports: A practical approach to addressing disciplinary
disproportionality with African American students. Multicultural Learning and Teaching,
13(2). https://doi.org/10.1515/mlt-2017-0013.
Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at
work. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 692–724.
Kerby, S., & Burns, C. (2012). The top 10 economic facts of diversity in the workplace. Center
for American Progress report, Washington, DC. https://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-
content/uploads/issues/2012/07/pdf/diverse_workplace.pdf
Kezar, A. (2001). Understanding and facilitating organizational change in the 21st century:
Recent research and conceptualizations. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, 28(4),
113–123.
Kirkpatrick, D., & Kirkpatrick, J. (2006). Evaluating training programs: The four levels. Berrett-
Koehler Publishers.
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick's four levels of training evaluation.
Association for Talent Development.
140
Kirschner, P., Kirschner, F., & Paas, F. (2006). Cognitive load theory.
http://www.education.com/reference/article/cognitive-load-theory/.
Koinis, A., Giannou, V., Drantaki, V., Angelaina, S., Stratou, E., & Saridi, M. (2015). The
impact of healthcare workers job environment on their mental-emotional health. coping
strategies: The case of a local general hospital. Health Psychology Research, 3(1).
Kourea, L., Lo, Y., & Owens, T. (2016). Using parental input from black families to increase
cultural responsiveness for teaching SWPBIS expectations. Behavioral Disorders, 41(4),
226–240. https://doi.org/10.17988/bedi-41-04-226-240.1
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice,
41(4), 212–218.
Kular, S., Gatenby, M., Rees, C., Soane, E., & Truss, K. (2008). Employee engagement: A
literature review.
Ladson-Billings, G. J. (1999). Preparing teachers for diverse student populations: A critical race
theory perspective. Review of Research in Education, 24, 211–247.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1167271
Lok, P., & Crawford, J. (1999). The relationship between commitment and organizational
culture, subculture, leadership style and job satisfaction in organizational change and
development. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 20(7), 365–374.
Losen, D. (2015). Closing the school discipline gap: Equitable remedies for excessive exclusion.
Educational Leaders College Press.
Losen, D. & Skiba, R. (2015-2016). From reaction to prevention: Turning the page on
school discipline. American Educator, 39(4), 4–11.
141
Lucile Packard Foundation for Children's Health. (2019). Special education recruitment by
race/ethnicity [Data set].
https://www.kidsdata.org/topic/97/special-needs-education-enrollment-race/
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). SAGE.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). How learning works. In Applying the science of learning (pp. 13–37, 44–
49). Pearson Education.
McCarter, S. (2017). The school-to-prison pipeline: A primer for social workers. Social Work,
62(1), 53–61.
McEwan, E. K., & McEwan, P. J. (2003). Making sense of research. SAGE.
McIntosh, K., & Goodman, S. (2016). Integrated multi-tiered systems of support: Blending RTI
and PBIS. Guilford Publications.
Medina, L. (2017). The effects classroom experiences and student conduct have on a teacher’s
self-efficacy in schools with positive behavior interventions and supports (Publication no.
10274447) [Doctoral dissertation]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
Mendez, L. M. R., & Knoff, H. M. (2003). Who gets suspended from school and why: A
demographic analysis of schools and disciplinary infractions in a large school district?
Education & Treatment of Children, 26(1), 30–51.
Merrell, K. W., & Walker, H. M. (2004). Deconstructing a definition: Social maladjustment
versus emotional disturbance and moving the EBD field forward. Psychology in the
Schools, 41(8), 899-910.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
142
Mikulyuk, A., & Braddock, J. (2018). K-12 School Diversity and Social Cohesion: Evidence in
Support of a Compelling State Interest. Education and Urban Society, 50(1), 5–37.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124516678045
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook
(2nd ed.). SAGE.
Monroe, C. R. (2005). Why are" bad boys" always Black?: Causes of disproportionality in
school discipline and recommendations for change. The Clearing House: A Journal of
Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 79(1), 45-50.
Morgan, D. L. (2007). Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained: Methodological implications of
combining qualitative and quantitative methods. Journal of mixed methods
research, 1(1), 48-76.
Moynihan, D. P., & Pandey, S. K. (2007). Finding workable levers over work motivation:
Comparing job satisfaction, job involvement, and organizational commitment.
Administration & Society, 39(7), 803-832. doi:10.1177/0095399707305546
Morrison, G., & Skiba, R. (2001). Predicting violence from school misbehavior: Promises and
perils. Psychology in the Schools, 38(2), 173-184. doi:10.1002/pits. 1008
Nagin, D., & Tremblay, R. E. (1999). Trajectories of boys’ physical aggression, opposition, and
hyperactivity on the path to physically violent and nonviolent juvenile delinquency. Child
Development, 70(5), 1181–1196.
National Center for Education Information. (2011). Profile of teachers in the U.S.
http://www.edweek.org/media/pot2011finalblog.pdf.
National Policy Board for Educational Administration (NPBEA). (2015) Professional standards
for educational leaders. Author.
143
Nelson, A. C. (2008). The impact of zero tolerance school discipline policies: Issues of
exclusionary discipline. National Association of School Psychologists.
Noguera, P. (2003). Schools, prisons, and social implications of punishment: Rethinking
disciplinary practices. Theory into Practice, 42(4), 341–350.
Owen, J., Wettach, J., & Hoffman, K. C. (2015). Instead of suspension: Alternative strategies for
effective school discipline.
https://law.duke.edu/childedlaw/schooldiscipline/downloads/instead_of_suspension.pdf
Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacy theory. http://www.education.com/reference/article/self-efficacy-
theory/
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (4th ed.). SAGE.
Patro, C. S. (2013). The impact of employee engagement on an organization’s productivity. In
Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Managing Human Resources at the
Workplace, Mysore, India.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667–686.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.667
Portnow, S., Downer, J., & Brown, J. (2018). Reductions in aggressive behavior within the
context of a universal, social emotional learning program: Classroom- and student-level
mechanisms. Journal of School Psychology, 68, 38–52.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2017.12.004
Purnell, L. (2005). The Purnell model for cultural competence. Journal of Multicultural Nursing
& Health, 11(2), 7.
144
Rea, L. M., & Parker, R. A. (2014). Designing and conducting survey research: A
comprehensive guide (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Ram, P., & Prabhakar, G. V. (2011). The role of employee engagement in work-related
outcomes. Interdisciplinary Journal of Research in Business, 1(3), 47–61.
Rasheed, A., Khan, S., & Ramzan, M. (2013). Antecedents and consequences of employee
engagement: The case of Pakistan. Journal of Business Studies Quarterly, 4(4), 183.
Redfield, S. E., & Nance, J. P. (2016). American bar association: Joint task force on reversing
the school-to-prison pipeline. The University of Memphis Law Review, 47(1), 1–180.
Robinson, S. B., & Firth Leonard, K. (2019). Designing quality survey questions. SAGE.
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance. Educational Leaders
College Press.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic
motivation, social development, and wellbeing. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78.
Saks, A. M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of
Managerial Psychology, 21(7), 600–619.
Saldaña J. (2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (3rd ed). SAGE.
Saffan, S., & Oswald, K. (2003). Positive behavior interventions and supports: Can schools
reshape behavior practices? Exceptional Children, 69(3), 361–373.
Salkind, N. J. (2017). Statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics: Using Microsoft Excel
2016 (4th ed.). SAGE.
Schatzman, S. & Mcdonald, M. (2011). Literature review on staff training and development.
Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship
with burnout and engagement: A multi‐sample study. Journal of Organizational
145
Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational
Psychology and Behavior, 25(3), 293-315.
Schlanger, M. (2012). Prison segregation: Symposium introduction and preliminary data on
racial disparities. Mich. J. Race & L., 18, 241.
Scott, P. G., & Pandey, S. K. (2005). Red tape and public service motivation: Findings from a
national survey of managers in state health and human services agencies. Review of
Public Personnel Administration, 25, 155–180.
Schein, E. H. (2004). Organizational culture and leadership. Jossey-Bass.
Scheuerman, W. E. (2016). Civil disobedience in the shadows of postnationalization and
privatization. Journal of International Political Theory, 12(3), 237-257.
Schwandt, D., & Marquardt, M. (1999). Steps and strategies for bringing organizational learning
to your organization. In Organizational learning from world class theories to global best
practices (pp. 227–249). St. Lucie Press.
Senge, P. (1990). The leader’s new work: Building learning organizations. Sloan Management
Review, 32(1), 7–23.
Shraw, G., & Lehman, S. (2009). Interest. http://www.education.com/reference/article/interest/.
Skiba, R. (2014). The failure of zero tolerance. Reclaiming Children & Youth, 22(4), 27–33.
Skiba, R., Arredondo, M., & Williams, N. (2014). More Than a Metaphor: The Contribution of
Exclusionary Discipline to a School-to-Prison Pipeline. Equity & Excellence in
Education, 47(4), 546–564. https://doi.org/10.1080/10665684.2014.958965
Skiba, R., Homer, R., Chung, C., Rausch, M., May, S., & Tobin, T. (2011). Race is not neutral:
A national investigation of African American and Latino disproportionality in school
discipline. School Psychology Review, 40(1), 85–107.
146
Skiba, R., Poloni-Staudinger, L., Gallini, S., Simmons, A., & Feggins-Azziz, R. (2006).
Disparate access: The disproportionality of African American students with disabilities
across educational environments. Exceptional Children, 72(4), 411–424.
Skinner, B. (1938). The behavior of organisms: An experimental analysis. D. Appleton-Century
Company.
Slemp, G. R., & Vella-Brodrick, D. A. (2014). Optimizing employee mental health: The
relationship between intrinsic need satisfaction, job crafting, and employee well-being.
Journal of Happiness Studies, 15(4), 957–977.
Sleeter, C. (2001). Preparing teachers for culturally diverse schools: Research and the
overwhelming presence of whiteness. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(2), 94–106.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487101052002002
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research (2nd ed). SAGE.
Sugai, G., & Homer, R. (2006). A promising approach for expanding and sustaining school-wide
positive behavior interventions and supports. School Psychology Review, 55(2), 245–259.
Sugai, G., & Homer, R. (2009). Responsiveness-to-intervention and school-wide positive
behavior interventions and supports: Integration of multi-tiered system approaches.
Exceptionality: A Special Education Journal, 17(4), 223–237.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09362830903235375
Sugai, G., & Simonsen, B. (2012). Positive behavioral interventions and supports: History,
defining features, and misconceptions In PBIS Revisited (pp. 1–8). Center for Positive
Behavioral Interventions and Supports.
147
Sullivan, A., Van Norman, E., & Klingbeil, D. (2014). Exclusionary discipline of students with
disabilities: Student and school characteristics predicting suspension. Remedial and
Special Education, 35(4), 199–210. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932513519825
Tampubolon, H. (2016). The relationship between employee engagement, job motivation, and
job satisfaction towards the employee performance. Corporate Ownership of Control,
13(2), 473–477
Tatebe, J. (2015). The ethics of difference: Ethical dilemmas of external researchers. Journal of
Academic Ethics, 13(3), 229–237. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-015-9236-4
Taylor, K. R. (2012). Discipline reforms: Several state legislatures are rethinking harsh zero-
tolerance policies and implementing strategies designed to change behavior before it
escalates to keep students in school. Principal Leadership, 13(3), 8.
Thapa, A., Cohen, J., Guffey, S., & Higgins-D’alessandro, A. (2013). A review of school climate
research. Review of Educational Research, 83(3), 357–385.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654313483907
Townsend, B. L. (2000). The disproportionate discipline of African American learners: Reducing
school suspensions and expulsions. Exceptional Children, 66(3), 381–391.
Tuzzolo, E., & Hewitt, D. T. (2006). Rebuilding inequity: The re-emergence of the school-to-
prison pipeline in New Orleans. High School Journal, 90(2), 59–68.
https://doi.org/10.1353/hsj.2007.0009
Upreti, G., Liaupsin, C., & Koonce, D. (2010). Stakeholder utility: Perspectives on school-wide
data for measurement, feedback, and evaluation. Education & Treatment of Children,
55(4), 497–511. doi:10.1353/etc.2010.0001
148
U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights. (2014). Civil rights data collection data
snapshot: School discipline (DOE Issue Brief No. 1).
http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/crdrc-discipline-snapshot.pdf
U.S. Departments of Education and Department of Justice (2011). Supportive schools discipline
initiative. https://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/school-discipline/appendix-3-
overview.pdf
Vancel, S., Missall, K., & Bruhn, A. (2016). Teacher ratings of the social validity of schoolwide
PBIS: A comparison of school groups. Preventing School Failure, 60(4), 320–328.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.2016.1157784
Veenman, M. V., Prins, F. J., & Verheij, J. (2003). Learning styles: Self‐reports versus thinking‐
aloud measures. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 73(3), 357-372.
Skiba, R., Mediratta, K., & Rausch, M. (2016). Inequality in school discipline: Research and
practice to reduce disparities. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-
51257-4
Vincent, C., Sprague, J., & Tobin, T. (2012). Exclusionary discipline practices across students’
racial/ethnic backgrounds and disability status: Findings from the Pacific Northwest.
Education and Treatment of Children, 35(4), 585–601.
Wakeman, S., Browder, D., Flowers, C., & Ahlgrim-Delzell, L. (2006). Principals’ Knowledge
of Fundamental and Current Issues in Special Education. NASSP Bulletin, 90(2), 153–
174. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192636506288858
Wald, J., & Losen, D. (2003). Defining and redirecting a school-to-prison pipeline. New
Directions for Youth Development, 2003(99), 9–15.
149
Ward, S. F. (2014). Racial imbalance feeds school-to-prison pipeline. ABA Journal, 100(A), 1–
131.
Waters, T., Marzano, R. J., & McNulty, B. (2003). Balanced leadership: What 30 years of
research tells us about the effect of leadership on student achievement. A working paper.
Weiss, R. S. (1994). Introduction. In Learning from strangers: The art and method of qualitative
interview studies. The Free Press.
Weingarten, R. (2015) Where We Stand: Moving Past Punishment Toward Support
American Educator Journal
Wigfield, A. & Eccles, J. S. (Eds.). (2001). Development of achievement motivation. Academic
Press.
Williams Shealey, M. (2009). Voices of African American doctoral students in special
education: addressing the shortage in leadership preparation. Race Ethnicity and
Education, 12(3), 349–361. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613320903178295
Wilson, H. (2014). Turning off the school-to-prison pipeline. Reclaiming Children & Youth,
25(1), 49-53.
Witzers, B., Bosker, R. J., & Kruger, M. L. (2003). Educational leadership and
student achievement: The elusive search for an association. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 39(3), 398-424.
Wood, P., Spandagou, I., & Evans, D. (2012). Principals’ confidence in managing disruptive
student behavior. Exploring geographical context in NSW primary schools. School
Leadership & Management, 32(4), 375–395. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.
2012.708329
150
Yough, M., & Anderman, E. (2006). Goal orientation theory. http://www.education.com/
reference/article/goal-orientation-theory/.
151
APPENDIX A
Survey Items
Research Question/
Data Type
KMO
Constr
uct
Survey Item (question
and response)
Scale of
Measure
ment
Potential
Analyses
Visual
Represent
ation
Demographic N/A Please indicate your race
or ethnic identity:
Hispanic/Latino/Chicano,
White/ European-
American, African
American/Black, Asian /
Asian Pacific Islander,
Native American, biracial,
prefer not to answer,
other
Nominal Percentage
Frequency
Pie Chart
Table
Demographic N/A How many years have you
been in your current
position?
Ratio Percentage,
Frequency,
Mode,
Median,
Mean,
Standard
Deviation,
Range
Table
Pie Chart
Demographic N/A What is your highest
degree earned?
Educational Specialist
Degree, Bachelors,
Masters, Doctorate
Ordinal Percentage,
Frequency
Mode,
Median,
Range
Pie Chart
Table
Demographic N/A I am: Male Female,
Transgender, non- binary,
Gender nonconforming,
other please state, decline
to answer
Nominal Percentage,
Frequency
Table
Pie Chart
Demographic I have a disability
I do not have a disability
Decline to state
Nominal Percentage.
Frequency
Table
Pie Chart
Demographic N/A How many years have you
been implementing PBIS
at your school?
Ratio Percentage,
Frequency,
Mode,
Median,
Mean,
Standard
Table
Pie Chart
152
Deviation,
Range
Demographic N/A Which if any of the
following strategies do
you use? Check all that
apply. Socio-emotional
learning, restorative
justice, mental health
counseling, and culturally
responsive teaching.
Nominal Percentage
Frequency
Table
Pie Chart
What is the state of
stakeholder
knowledge and
motivation related to
implementing Positive
Behavior
Interventions and
Supports (PBIS)?
K-C What would say are the
most positive impacts to
implementing PBIS on
your campus?
What are the negative
impacts?
Open-
ended
What is the state of
stakeholder
knowledge and
motivation related to
implementing Positive
Behavior
Interventions and
Supports (PBIS)?
K-C Are there any other
barriers that you have
identified that were not
on the list?
To what extent have you
been able to mitigate
barriers to implementing
PBIS at your school and
how?
Open-
ended
What is the state of
stakeholder
knowledge and
motivation related to
implementing Positive
Behavior
Interventions and
Supports (PBIS)?
K-C As a school that has been
recognized by the PBIS
coalition for
implementing PBIS with
fidelity, describe and list
what you feel are best
practices for
implementing PBIS for
African American students
and African American
student with disabilities.
Open-
ended
What is the state of
stakeholder
knowledge and
motivation related to
implementing Positive
Behavior
M-V Teachers at my school are
rewarded for teaching
culturally relevant
curriculum. Likert scale ¨
Strongly Disagree ¨
Somewhat Disagree ¨
Ordinal Percentage,
Frequency,
Mode,
Median,
Range
Table,
Stacked
Bar Chart
153
Interventions and
Supports (PBIS)?
Somewhat Agree ¨
Strongly Agree
What is the state of
stakeholder
knowledge and
motivation related to
implementing Positive
Behavior
Interventions and
Supports (PBIS)?
K-P Please describe how you
promote cooperative
learning across cultures at
your school?
Open-
ended
What is the state of
stakeholder
knowledge and
motivation related to
implementing Positive
Behavior
Interventions and
Supports (PBIS)?
K-D The literature has
identified the following
barriers, which of these
barriers have been the
significant barriers in
implementing PBIS at the
middle school or high
school level.
-lack of collaboration/buy-
in
-lack of time
-lack of knowledge on
making data driven
decisions
-disagreement with PBIS
philosophy
-lack of specificity on
procedures
-lack of
relationships/rapport
building with students
Other- fill in the blank
Nominal Percentage,
Frequency,
Mode,
Median,
Mean,
Standard
Deviation,
Range
Table
Pie Chart
What is the state of
stakeholder
knowledge and
motivation related to
implementing Positive
Behavior
Interventions and
Supports (PBIS)?
M-SE I feel confident in my
ability to create a specific
acknowledgement system
for students meeting
behavioral expectations.
Scale 0-10 0-not confident
at all and 10 very
confident I can do it
Ordinal Percentage,
Frequency
Mode,
Median,
Range
Table
Stacked
Bar Chart
What is the state of
stakeholder
knowledge and
motivation related to
implementing Positive
Behavior
Interventions and
Supports (PBIS)?
M-SE I am confident in my
ability to ensure that all
three tiers of PBIS are
being implement with
high degrees of fidelity.
Scale 0-10 0-not confident
at all and 10 very
confident I can do it
Ordinal Percentage,
Frequency,
Mode,
Median,
Range
Table,
Stacked
Bar Chart
154
What is the state of
stakeholder
knowledge and
motivation related to
implementing Positive
Behavior
Interventions and
Supports (PBIS)?
M-SE I am certain in my ability
to ensure that behavioral
expectations are visible
around the school and in
every classroom. Scale 0-
10 0-not confident at all
and 10 very confident I
can do it
Ordinal Percentage,
Frequency,
Mode,
Median,
Range
Table,
Stacked
Bar Chart
What is the state of
stakeholder
knowledge and
motivation related to
implementing Positive
Behavior
Interventions and
Supports (PBIS)?
M-SE I am certain that I can
assist teachers in
managing problem
behaviors in their
classrooms. Scale 0-10 0-
not confident at all and 10
very confident I can do it
Ordinal Percentage,
Frequency,
Mode,
Median,
Range
Table,
Stacked
Bar Chart
What is the state of
stakeholder
knowledge and
motivation related to
implementing Positive
Behavior
Interventions and
Supports (PBIS)?
M-SE I am certain that I can
support teachers who are
struggling with the
implementation of PBIS.
Scale 0-10 0-not confident
at all and 10 very
confident I can do it
Ordinal Percentage,
Frequency,
Mode,
Median,
Range
Table,
Stacked
Bar Chart
What is the state of
stakeholder
knowledge and
motivation related to
implementing Positive
Behavior
Interventions and
Supports (PBIS)?
M-V I value a curriculum that
challenges stereotypes.
Likert scale ¨ Strongly
Disagree ¨ Somewhat
Disagree ¨ Somewhat
Agree ¨ Strongly Agree
Ide search group scales
together use best
measure though
Ordinal Percentage,
Frequency,
Mode,
Median,
Range
Table,
Stacked
Bar Chart
How does the
interaction between
organizational culture
and context and
stakeholder
knowledge and
motivation influence
implementation of
PBIS?
M-V I value cognitive/
neurodiversity. Likert
scale ¨ Strongly Disagree ¨
Somewhat Disagree ¨
Somewhat Agree ¨
Strongly Agree
Ordinal Percentage,
Frequency,
Mode,
Median,
Mean,
Range
Table,
Stacked
Bar Chart
How does the
interaction between
organizational culture
and context and
M-V Describe the steps you
have taken to decrease
the rate of suspensions
and expulsions for African
Open-
ended
155
stakeholder
knowledge and
motivation influence
implementation of
PBIS?
American students with
disabilities.
Have you taken any
specific steps to decrease,
yes, no, I don’t know then
skip
What percent of A.A.
student’s what percent of
A.A. with disabilities what
percent of Special Needs
students?
How does the
interaction between
organizational culture
and context and
stakeholder
knowledge and
motivation influence
implementation of
PBIS?
M-V I believe that the
disproportionality in
suspension rates for
African American students
with disabilities is a
pressing issue that needs
attention. Likert scale ¨
Strongly Disagree ¨
Somewhat Disagree ¨
Somewhat Agree ¨
Strongly Agree
Ordinal Percentage,
Frequency,
Mode,
Median,
Range
Table,
Stacked
Bar Chart
How does the
interaction between
organizational culture
and context and
stakeholder
knowledge and
motivation influence
implementation of
PBIS?
M-V Please list in order to the
most valued strategy to
incorporate special needs
students in the school
wide PBIS framework.
Rate the level of
importance great
importance, some
importance etc.
• modifications and
accommodations
for SWPBIS
behavior
expectation
lessons
• general education
teachers including
special needs
students in PBIS
initiatives
• combining
individual
reinforcement
Ordinal Percentage,
Frequency,
Mode,
Median,
Mean,
Range
Table,
Stacked
Bar Chart
156
systems with the
SWPBIS
reinforcement
systems.
• teachers have a
high degree of
fidelity
implementing
PBIS.
How does the
interaction between
organizational culture
and context and
stakeholder
knowledge and
motivation influence
implementation of
PBIS?
M-V I value policies to reduced
suspension rates for
African American students
and African American
students with disabilities.
Likert scale ¨ Strongly
Disagree ¨ Somewhat
Disagree ¨ Somewhat
Agree ¨ Strongly Agree
Ordinal Percentage,
Frequency,
Mode,
Median,
Mean,
Range
Table,
Stacked
Bar Chart
For the next few
questions, select one
option between each set of
adjectives that best
represents how you would
rate your school based on
your direct experiences:
Hostile to Friendly,
Racist to Non-racist,
Homogenous to Diverse,
Disrespectful to
Respectful, Individualistic
to Collaborative,
Competitive to
Cooperative,
Homophobic to Non-
homophobic,
Unsupportive to
Supportive,
Unwelcoming to
Welcoming, Elitist to
Non-elitist
As an educational leader I
promote a strong
commitment to diversity,
inclusion, and equity at
my school. Likert scale ¨
Strongly Disagree ¨
Somewhat Disagree ¨
157
Somewhat Agree ¨
Strongly Agree
What is the
interaction between
organizational culture
and context and
school administrators’
knowledge and
motivation?
O-CS Please list and describe
what resources your
school needs to more
effectively implement
PBIS.
Do you feel like you need
any additional resources?
Skip follow up what do
you need
Open-
ended
What is the
interaction between
organizational culture
and context and
school administrators’
knowledge and
motivation?
M-V My school values the
following rating bar: Trust
Cooperation, Tolerance,
Responsibility, Honesty,
Friendship, Respect,
Appreciation, Caring,
Happiness, Unity,
Understanding
Ordinal Percentage,
Frequency,
Mode,
Median,
Mean,
Range
Table
Stacked
Bar Chart
What is the
interaction between
organizational culture
and context and
school administrators’
knowledge and
motivation?
O-CS Please describe what
barriers you have
overcome to
implementing PBIS
Have you overcome any
barriers to implementing
PBIS?
Open-
ended
What is the
interaction between
organizational culture
and context and
school administrators’
knowledge and
motivation?
0-CS It is important for my
school to have a fully
stocked student store of
tangible reinforcements
for PBIS implementation?
Likert scale ¨ Strongly
Disagree ¨ Somewhat
Disagree ¨ Somewhat
Agree ¨ Strongly Agree
Ordinal Percentage,
Frequency,
Mode,
Median,
Mean,
Range
Table
Stacked
Bar Chart
What is the
interaction between
organizational culture
and context and
school administrators’
knowledge and
motivation?
O-CM Please describe the
process of how you create
school norms and or what
is considered appropriate
behaviors at your school.
Open-
ended
What is the
interaction between
O-CM Students and parents are
actively involved in
Ordinal Percentage,
Frequency,
Table
158
organizational culture
and context and
school administrators’
knowledge and
motivation?
helping create school
norms. Likert scale ¨
Strongly Disagree ¨
Somewhat Disagree ¨
Somewhat Agree ¨
Strongly Agree
Mode,
Median,
Mean,
Range
Stacked
Bar Chart
What is the
interaction between
organizational culture
and context and
school administrators’
knowledge and
motivation?
O-CM All school staff, teachers,
and administrators value
creating culturally
responsive school norms.
Likert scale ¨ Strongly
Disagree ¨ Somewhat
Disagree ¨ Somewhat
Agree ¨ Strongly Agree
Ordinal Percentage,
Frequency,
Mode,
Median,
Mean,
Range
Table
Stacked
Bar Chart
What is the
interaction between
organizational culture
and context and
school administrators’
knowledge and
motivation?
O-CM Please list and provide a
rationale for all the
multicultural norms at
your school.
Open-
ended
Demographic N/A Would you be willing to
participate in a follow-up
Zoom video-conferencing
interview? If so, please
provide your name,
contact information and
the best time to reach
you.
159
APPENDIX B
Interview Protocol
Thank you for much for allowing me to interview you today! Your perspective as a leader and
principal of your school, I highly value and I appreciate your time. I want to ensure you that I am
taking all measures to protect your confidentiality. I have received your written consent for me to
record this conversation, but I would like to ask you again, do I have permission to record?
Thank you! Let’s begin!
1. Describe how you support and train teachers on how to gain knowledge of and implement
behavior support plans, antecedent manipulations, and alternative behaviors.
2. Describe how you foster metacognition surrounding time-management in your teachers.
3. Describe how you encourage culturally responsive positive behavior interventions and
supports.
Yes, thank you, now thinking about collaboration,
4. Describe what steps you take to foster collaboration and buy-in for Positive behavior
interventions and supports among multilevel school staff at the middle school or high
school level.
5. How do you feel about your ability to support teachers implement Positive behavior
interventions and Supports?
160
6. How do you feel about your ability to support teachers implement Culturally Responsive
Positive behavior interventions and Supports?
7. Describe how you allocate resources to PBIS.
8. There are many things that contribute to being a great principal and leader. I am going to
read you a list of activities and I would like you to prioritize them in order of what is
most important in your approach to leadership.
- High quality instruction
- Parental engagement
- Implementing positive behavior interventions and supports and classroom
behavior management
- Effective communication
- Positive culture and climate
- Encouraging cultural responsiveness
9. In what ways if any has using rewards instead of punitive consequences benefitted your
school, the teachers, staff, and the students?
10. Do teachers have time set aside in their schedule to work on PBIS? If so, how much
time?
11. Describe how you ensure teacher’s enough time in their work schedule to implement
positive behavior interventions and supports.
12. Describe the strategies you use to communicate the value of collaboration among all
school staff.
161
13. If applicable, in what ways if any has using culturally responsiveness instead of PBIS
alone benefitted your school, the teachers, staff, and the students?
Now switching gears to the process of suspension, expulsion, and specific students
14. Describe the process of deciding to suspend or expel a student based on a teacher
referral?
15. Has it changed since the implementation of Positive behavior interventions and supports?
If so, how?
16. Before and after the implementation of PBIS do you see the same children and same
teachers giving and getting referrals?
17. How do you feel about the affect PBIS is having on the population of African American
and disabled students at your school?
18. If applicable, how has the implementation of Culturally Responsive Positive Behavior
Interventions and Supports affected the African American students with and without
disabilities and at your school?
19. How has the addition of cultural responsiveness affected the teachers and school staff?
162
Thank you so much for your responses! Is there anything else that I should have asked you that I
did not, or anything else you would like to add?
163
APPENDIX C
Sample Evaluation Measuring Kirkpatrick Levels
In an effort to evaluate the effectiveness and vitality of the workshops we have created this
evaluation tool to learn from your experience. Therefore, your feedback is essential to helping us
improve this process. Please circle the number that represents your assessment.
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Agree
I feel I can implement CRPBIS at my school site 1 2 3 4 5
I feel the meeting is meaningful and relevant 1 2 3 4 5
to my professional development
I am confident in my ability to implement restorative justice at my school site
1 2 3 4 5
The process has improved my understanding of the 1 2 3 4 5
barriers of implementing PBIS
I value implicit bias training 1 2 3 4 5
I am committed to reducing suspensions for African American students with and without
disabilities 1 2 3 4 5
What suggestions do you have to improve equitable discipline practices for African American
students with and without disabilities?
______________________________________________________________________________
What specific outcomes are you hoping to achieve from workshop and or course?
______________________________________________________________________________
We want to hear from you regarding your experience participating in the workshops. The
information you provide to us will continue to improve the process. This being said, please take
164
time the next few minutes to respond to the below questions. Please check the number that
represents your experience.
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Agree
Questions 1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10
Looking back at the purpose of the
workshops, it was a good use of
your time.
As a participant, I have a better
understanding of how to allocate
resources to PBIS.
I value equity, diversity, and
inclusion.
I have observed positive outcomes
for students and staff when
implementing PBIS
I recognize my role in
accomplishing 100% of teachers
implement culturally competent
PBIS
I am confident about my ability to
implement the things I learned in
this workshop.
I can create an action plan to
reduce exclusionary discipline
practices for African American
students with and without
disabilities.
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
Utilizing Clark and Estes's (2008) gap analysis, this study evaluated positive behavior interventions and supports (PBIS) effectiveness to reduce disparate rates of exclusionary discipline practices for African American students with and without disabilities in California middle and high schools. This study aimed to discover best practices for increased equitable outcomes in discipline practices for African American students without disabilities. This study also aimed to unpack and overcome some of the barriers to implementing PBIS at the middle and high school levels. The data identified gaps in knowledge regarding best practices for African American students with and without disabilities and gaps in knowledge when identifying and eliminating barriers in implementing PBIS at the middle and high school levels. The data identified gaps in motivation when implementing all three tiers of PBIS with fidelity and a gap in motivation to communicate and value diversity, equity, and inclusion. Lastly, the study found an organizational barrier: a lack of creating multicultural school norms. In conclusion, it is recommended that to increase equitable outcomes in closing the discipline gap for African American students with and without disabilities, PBIS is combined with culturally competent methods (CRPBIS), implicit bias training, and restorative justice (SWPRD).
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
The role of positive behavior systems in reducing exclusionary school discipline
PDF
Teacher perception on positive behavior interventions and supports’ (PBIS) cultivation for positive teacher-student relationships in high schools: an evaluation study
PDF
Reducing suspensions through implementation of schoolwide PBIS
PDF
Positive behavior intervention support plan: a gap analysis
PDF
Promoting a positive school culture from three perspectives: a promising practices study from the administrator perspective
PDF
Teachers' classroom pedagogy and perception: In schools with high rates of exclusionary discipline practices for African American students
PDF
The characteristics of high schools that have successfully implemented Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports
PDF
The implementation of a multi-tiered system of support at Downtown Unified School District: an analysis of teacher needs
PDF
Analyzing middle school teachers’ implementation and sustainability of professional development regarding non-exclusionary discipline practices
PDF
Promoting equity in discipline practices for Latino students: a gap analysis
PDF
Equitable schooling for African American students: an evaluation study
PDF
Impact of disciplinary and alternative practices on educational access
PDF
Racial disparities in U.S. K-12 suburban schools: an evaluation study
PDF
A qualitative examination of PBIS team members' perceptions of urban high school teachers' role in implementing tier 2 schoolwide positive behavior supports
PDF
Minding the gap: an evaluation of faculty, staff and administrator readiness to close equity gaps at the California State University
PDF
First-generation college students and persistence to a degree: an evaluation study
PDF
KMO factors influencing the culturally responsive implementation of PBIS: a mixed-methods study
PDF
The implementation of a multi-tiered system of support in Downtown Unified School District: an analysis of site administrator needs
PDF
Disproportionate exclusionary discipline for special education‐identified students: an improvement study
PDF
Sustainable intervention for learning gaps in middle school mathematics: a gap analysis
Asset Metadata
Creator
Thomas, Apryl Marie
(author)
Core Title
PBIS and equity for African American students with and without disabilities: a gap analysis
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)
Publication Date
10/16/2020
Defense Date
08/13/2020
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
African American students,black students,California,California high schools,California middle schools,CRPBIS,culturally responsive positive behavior supports and interventions,disparate exclusionary discipline rates, suspensions, and expulsions,diversity,equity,inclusion,OAI-PMH Harvest,PBIS,positive behavior supports,positive behavior supports and interventions,restorative justice
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Muraszewski,, Alison K. (
committee chair
)
Creator Email
apryl_thomas@yahoo.com,apryltho@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-384182
Unique identifier
UC11666644
Identifier
etd-ThomasApry-9048.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-384182 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-ThomasApry-9048.pdf
Dmrecord
384182
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Thomas, Apryl Marie
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Tags
African American students
black students
California high schools
California middle schools
CRPBIS
culturally responsive positive behavior supports and interventions
disparate exclusionary discipline rates, suspensions, and expulsions
equity
inclusion
PBIS
positive behavior supports
positive behavior supports and interventions
restorative justice